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

A New Kick for MORE: IdeaLcenter Launches 2nd Kickstarter

By on September 17th, 2014 9:13 am

M.O.R.E. | Turn-based space 4X strategy game by ideaLcenter indie studio

IdeaLcenter, the indie studio behind M.O.R.E., a turn-based space 4X strategy game that was kickstarted in 2012, has turned to Kickstarter once more. In the first campaign, they managed to secure around $90,000 USD. In this second push they ask for $10,000 more with stretch goals going up to $50,000 from having deep space stations to more advanced space battles.

Regarding the initial plan, IdeaLcenter admitted that they were too optimistic regarding their initial schedule. Indeed, long gone is the December 2013 target for the game release announced during their first kickstarter campaign.

Unfortunately our assumed completion date for M.O.R.E. was too optimistic. This happened despite the daily work of our team members, working after hours, and often on weekends and holidays. However, this project is our passion, and most of the hardest (and least visible to players) work is behind us. –Idea-L-Center Team

M.O.R.E. | Starmap and fleet management

But, besides delays and optimistic assumptions, the devs explain that the initially targeted features are still to be carried out as planned, even if this second campaign doesn’t succeed.

So, why this second kickstarter campaign now? Besides the usual “give people another opportunity to get on board with us” call, the devs explain that the main reason for this second campaign is to secure the extra funds necessary to implement new features and to enhance the game’s overall production value by improving the graphics, animations, sound effects and music.

We see other possibilities to expand M.O.R.E. and make it more like the AAA quality game we know you want to see. The most important thing though, is that our main target isn’t threatened in any way. Even if this campaign doesn’t succeed, we promise that you will still see M.O.R.E. released. This will just make it better.

Here’s what they have to show at the moment. In the campaign’s comments, the devs say that the plan is to release a series of video updates in the following days where they’ll be showing how the game looks in “normal play”.

     Subscribe RSS

Tags: , , , , , ,


  1. t1it says:

    Need to see more game play videos.

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      We plan to release video update every Friday. There will be 8. video updates showing different aspects of our game.
      If there won’t be any technical problems, the first one should be presented tomorrow.

      • David Carron says:

        I really appreciate your vision and pluck.
        I wish you all the best and would be thrilled to send you money…
        But only for a finished product.

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          Of course it’s your choice.. and we respect it.
          But we’re very grateful to those people who have faith with us, and support us now or from the beginning. Without them, our game will never exist, and you won’t have oportunity to play M.O.R.E.

  2. Mark says:

    I’m quite dubious about the prospects of this game ever seeing the light. With that in mind I think I’ll hold onto my wallet, and wait and see if they surprise me,

  3. Vendor-Lazarus says:

    I really shouldn’t have watched that kickstarter video.
    It looks so good I’m almost hyping it up to myself.
    I might actually back it..possibly..maybe..perhaps.

    I was a bit wary when they mentioned full 3D galaxy.
    It should sound great, but the implementations so far in games have been ..dubious.
    I only play on flat maps in SoTS I for example.
    Free camera and that 3D grid brought me around to thinking that they might actually pull it off.

    Glad to see the pre-reviews coming, despite the forum going mostly deserted.
    You are sorely needed. My thanks to you.
    The other two sites I know are either more “ship-captain”-centered or using a form of java I can’t view in my normal browser.
    Just found it yesterday though. Could tweak some setting perhaps.

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      We also have other interesting ideas, which you will be able to see in upcoming updates :)

    • Holy-Fire says:

      So true! The 3D map was a huge turnoff for me when I watched the video in the original MORE kickstarter; still hoping they’ll pull it off though.

      And true about SotS as well. I tried flat maps but it’s just not the same as a true 2D maps. I play(ed) in 3D maps, but only as humans where the star lanes make the map easier to understand.

  4. hakkarin says:

    Having watched that video preview, I am of the view that they ran out of money for trying to make the game bigger and better than is realistic. Looks like this is another case of a kickstarter promising they can do a lot with litle money, only to turn around and say “hey we need more money”.

    I actually backed this at first then then quickly changed my mind after a couple of months once I realized their promises weren’t realistic. Looks like I made a good decision.

  5. David Carron says:

    Yeah… I LOVE what MORE has talked about and am thrilled at the idea of a MOO update. Dyson Spheres potentionally make the late game busywork much simplified.

    However, for them to go back to the well a second time, without producing from the first, seems ballsy.

    I want them to succeed and will be thrilled to throw them cash… But only for a finished product.

    I can not comprehend why they aren’t doing this after they release as DLC or an expansion.

  6. TimmY says:

    Looks really good but I keep my expectations lower for now. It’s better that way :)

    They have plenty of time to polish and improve this game. I see the estimated delivery is December 2015.

  7. ashbery76 says:

    I see a collection of UI mocks up and no actual game after how long? I called it vapourware way back and see no change.

  8. Szkeptik says:

    Weird that so much time after the planned launch date they just come out with a second kickstarter. Makes me think they may have gone overbudget and are trying to pull the extra money in somehow. I’ll hold back on this one, though it looks nice.

  9. Bynaus says:

    Looks like feature creep to me. I admire the aspiration and goal of the developers, and some of the graphics are stunning! But the problem with MORE seems to be that there is always MORE cool features that can be added. Always! I can think of tons of cool features that could have been added to MOO2, the “king”! Who, for example, really needs custom galaxy shapes? Com’on: Develop a playable game first that sets the basis for MORE features added in later iterations. Even MOO2 had one (or two) predecessors…

  10. Jeff P says:

    I’m somewhat embarrassed to admit I was a Kickstarter backer, and the experience (along with Predestination) has made me swear-off crowd-funding schemes.

    According to M.O.R.E monthly project updates, the development team began squabbling amongst themselves shortly after receiving funding, shed many of the original team members, and game progress has limped along at a snail’s pace since then. Few (if any) of the developers had any experience in producing commercial computer games, and it is painfully obvious they have bitten off far more than they can chew. Now they are launching a SECOND Kickstarter campaign to include features in the game that were supposed to have been in the original project.

    I seriously doubt M.O.R.E. will ever see the light of day, and if by some miracle it does, will not have been worth the wait.

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      I’m sorry JeffP, but I can’t agree with you.
      Just check this site with our updates.
      Is this slow progress for small team, with limited budget, creating so big game?

      So… “squabbling amongst themselves” ? You’ve to mistake teams.

      Also, our team is constant from the beginning. The only chanes was that Dominika was replaced by Emil after first 2 weeks of our campaign, as she alone decided that she don’t cope with our project and expectations.
      And Michael have to resign for family purposes. Then we have a little problems with finding second 3D graphican but.. that’s all.

      Just compare 1st and 2nd KS video.
      Marcin B, Stanislaw, Andrzej, Artur, Marek, Greg, Marcin C are still here (and they are mentioned on 1st and presented on 2nd video) Also Emil, Tomek are working with us from 2 years… so please, don’t spread false news. Thank you.

      • Jeff P says:

        I really wish I had kept all your Project Updates. I distinctly recall an early one indicating serious disagreement between your team members, team members leaving the project, and later, a plea for outside help with translations etc. Add that to the game being in the pre-alpha phase even after two years of development and a new KS project to add features that look suspiciously like those in the original KS video, and I believe my skepticism of M.O.R.E.’s development pace is more than warranted.

        Prove me wrong: produce and release a good (not even great) game within a reasonable time frame, and I’ll happily eat my words.

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          I hope you’ll be a little more satisfied and have more faith when you’ll see our upcoming updates :)

        • AstralWanderer says:

          @Jeff P: “…I distinctly recall an early one indicating serious disagreement between your team members, team members leaving the project…”

          It was the (backers only) update #17 “Hard Work”

          “Others we have to let go – because they didn’t fulfill the hopes we have on them. And also we’ve had a one black sheep in our pack. It was friend of a friend, and after kickstarter ends he wanted to earn much more than we talked before ($1600 per month instead of $500). We didn’t come to terms, so he suddenly demanded $2200 for his little help on Kickstarter presentation – which earlier he declared that he would do for free – and threatened us with court.. ”

          So not a core team breakup, but easy to mistake as such.

          I’m also one who backed the original KS and I’m distinctly mixed over this. Running a second crowdfunder should be seen as a sign of failure, but M.O.R.E. is hardly the first here (World of Magic being a high-profile example and Vigrior the earliest I recall – with KS, IndieGoGo and then Desura Alpha Funding). However this is M.O.R.E’s third crowdfunder – they raised $3,492 through IndieGoGo at

          On the other hand, they’ve been upfront about their issues and some of the changes look very positive (ditching XNA which required .NET Framework and all the bloat that added to the Windows Registry – something that put me completely off PreDestination, plus XNA is no longer supported by Microsoft).

          My reservation is that a $10,000 goal looks rather low (while not pocket money, the ~$9,000 that would raise hardly seems worth the overheads of a KS) which suggests that the “real goal” is more likely the $50,000 mark, with a lower target set to maximise the chance of success.

          Still, it is an opportunity for others to join in with a better idea of what’s on offer.

        • Wodzu says:

          @AstralWanderer I wouldn’t be so optimistic regarding no more need for use .NET Framework. They could have stick with .NET but just switched engine.

        • AstralWanderer says:

          @Wodzu: Possible, but I’ve yet to encounter a Unity game requiring .NET Framework since Unity itself runs on Mono and doesn’t support .NET directly, see

          Switching to Unity should allow for Mac/Linux compatibility, which a .NET Framework requirement would prevent.

        • Wodzu says:

          @AstralWanderer: Thanks for the link.

  11. Zero says:

    If I had to have paid myself a programmer’s salary while making StarDrive, then I would have gone broke too. To all aspiring indies: get lean early. In order of priority you need to (A) pay for housing (B) pay for food (C) pay for internet. If you can’t figure out how that is going to happen for a period of 2 years before your game comes out, then you’re gonna have a bad time.

    If you do have that figured out, then you should be able to budget everything else with whatever funds you can raise from crowd-funding or Kickstarter or whatever. If any of your team members are dipping into those funds to pay for their necessities, then again, I think you’re gonna have a bad time.

    Anyway, don’t write these guys off for making those kinds of mistakes. They just seem to be in the throes of having a bad time.

    • Mark says:

      Their game actually looks really good and seems to have great promise so I wish them all the best, and I’m definitely keeping an open mind about the outcome. But I’ve had it with kickstarter and paying money for nothing but nebulous ideas. Faith is for religion.

      From now on I only pay for a 100% real, *existing* final release. And then only after reading several good reviews.

  12. chuki792 says:

    Meh, I’ve backed my last early access/kickstarter after yet another of my prospects turned out to be crud; Lords of the black sun… stealth released from early access half finished without so much as a by your leave… I’m done!

  13. Joel says:

    This is the only project I’ve ever backed on Kickstarter. Though progressing slowly, it looks great. If they are able to complete their vision, I think the game will be amazing. If not, I’m out the price of a meal at a good restaurant.
    Keep it going IdeaLcenter!

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      Thank you. We are sure that we will finish our game. We just don’t want to lower our possibilities, and to create this game as we want it to be.

      Our progress is slowly because we are small team, and our project is about huge and complex game. I think our 8 upcoming updates can take over 2 hours or even more. And if people can’t see complexity of our game, that’s good. Because it means that our interface is quite simple, but game is deep.

      I hope that our updates will make you even more happy Joel, and others people will gain more faith in us.

      • csebal says:

        Talking about updates, here are a few things you really should touch:

        – where are you now in development (bullet point list on whats done, whats still needed, where is progress on that, when you plan on completing it, etc)
        – why have you missed your originally planned deadline
        – what do you plan on doing to ensure that it does not repeat in the future
        – how do you plan on spending the money you get from the second kickstarter. Why do you need it, what will you use it for.

        It is called trasparency and it is a key factor in earning and keeping trust. The moment people see you are not 100% honest about what you do and how and why things are the way they are, you will lose them.

        • ChrisB says:

          “- why have you missed your originally planned deadline
          – what do you plan on doing to ensure that it does not repeat in the future”

          Those are the biggest problem with going back for MORE time and money when not delivering the first time.

          After 2 years there should be something partially playable. Worlds of magic is a good example of trying to replicate a classic that is not feature complete but shows real playable progress…

        • Wodzu says:

          Points 1,2,4 were already explained by them.

      • IdeaLCenter says:

        Where we are in developement is visible in our updates (link above in Jeff P conversation) also you can check our forum topic with our progress and goals to achieve Alpha status:

        It’s impossible to create great complex game in 1 year. Now we know it. It won’t repeat, because we’ve already done plenty of our job, and we are before pre-alpha tests which will surely starts this year. Then we will go to alpha>beta>release road. We wrote about this many times in many places…

        With all due respect to Word of Magic team, I think we have just a little more complicated game, and we didn’t start creating our game from space battles, but from foundations of our game.

        Our updates will be about game, not about explaining. Anyway when you see our progress in real game video you’ll get more confidence to our work. At least we hope so.

        Our Kickstarter 2 video update plans:
        1. Galaxy.
        2. Start Menu.
        3. Space battle plans.
        4. Fleets and ships preferences.
        5. Space systems, colonies, buildings, economy.
        6. Space object list, science, leaders.
        7. Races – interface, music, story, omnipedia.
        8. Espionage, diplomacy, informations.

        • csebal says:

          You started a KS campaign, without giving people an overview of where you are, what you are missing and how you plan on spending the extra funds.

          You expect your potential backers to “find” the information scattered in various updates of the original KS campaign.

          Boy, you got to learn a thing or two about how to sell something, because what you are doing now ain’t it.

          Last, but not least:
          You have the usual misconception of making an engine and thinking of it as a game. From the videos I saw, I can tell you are pretty damn far from it being an actual game. Yes, the building blocks of a game are there already, mostly, but guess what.. its a thousand piece puzzle that you now have to assemble into a whole picture and you will soon realize, that its a lot harder than it was just painting the individual puzzle pieces.

          Then again, maybe it is just me being misinformed about your game in which case you should circle back to my first point about wanting to make the status of your game pretty damn clear and convincing to everyone reading your KS project.

          EDIT: In the original KS campaign, update #28 has a pretty decent summary. I suggest you do something similar for the current KS campaign. The more detail you can go into on your progress, the better.

          Nonetheless, i said my piece, take it or leave it.

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          Thank you for your advice.
          You can check our progress in upcoming update videos.
          First of them is here:

    • Wodzu says:

      That is exactly my way of thinking!

      And so many folks make so big drama about spending 18$? This is ridiculous:)

      • Vanhal says:

        I don’t think this is about spending 18$ at all. It’s about yet another looming disappointment after seeing team after team failing to deliver something worth playing and paying for.

        I hope to be mistaken here, and i really wish them good luck.

      • Happy Corner says:

        What Vanhal said. Also, some of us only have a finite amount of free time. We can’t waste it playing every mediocre Early Access or mismanaged Kickstarter game that MIGHT someday get better.

        Not that I’m necessarily accusing MORE of being in the latter category. I’m just saying out there’s plenty of reason to be disappointed in bad games even when they’re dirt cheap.

  14. Neil says:

    Looks like a game that is trying to do too much. Most strategy games work better with a clear focus. M002 was exceptional in that it managed to work well with a dual focus (tactical combat / planetary development). However, MOO2 had a small galaxy, streamlined espionage, streamlined RPG elements, etc. It was also developed by a large studio. This game has a huge galaxy, even more detailed combat options than M002, detailed espionage, etc.

  15. Klaus says:

    I would have participated with the MORE kickstarter but I realized thats it not quite that what I want from a game which claims to be the MOO2 successor. For example I would rather had preferred if they just add up size of the universe (dyson sphere sounds good) add a number of new races and new techs but let the core MOO2 game rules intact. There is no reason to design new rules if the old ones are great and well functioning. (eg the great 2D tactical combat mechanics or the very balanced freighter mechanics where I can transport my guys from planet to planet)

    As it is now they have new ideas, thats fine but not enough for me to invest. In my opinion its doubtful that their ideas can substitute the well designed MOO2 rule network. The future will show if I was wrong or not.

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      Hello Klaus.

      You are right – we’ve moved from 2D space combat to 3D, but we stay at turn-based combat.
      But we’ve got freighters system too for transporting food, raw minerals and people :)
      Our game is different from MoO2, that’s true… but we’ve tried not to spoil which was good in it.

    • AstralWanderer says:

      @Klaus: “There is no reason to design new rules if the old ones are great and well functioning. (eg the great 2D tactical combat mechanics or the very balanced freighter mechanics where I can transport my guys from planet to planet)”

      I recall MOO2’s tactical combat as being poor for large-scale battles, with its simple initiative system and lack of formations (ships were just lined up). Also it placed a pretty low limit on fleet size, restricted you to 5 ship designs, had a ground combat model almost as bad as GalCiv2’s and didn’t require strategic thinking over colony development (you could build almost every building on any planet given time).

      So it had its good points (ship design with weapon miniaturisation at higher tech levels would be my favourite), but just scaling it up would make the weaknesses more apparent in my view.

      @Klaus: “In my opinion its doubtful that their ideas can substitute the well designed MOO2 rule network.”

      This I think is going to be the biggest issue – balancing and playtesting game systems to ensure that playing M.O.R.E. is challenging and fun. Given what IdeaLCenter has posted so far, I suspect they’ve not even begun on that process and that ultimately is where games succeed or fail. Of course, you can’t do balancing until the main parts (combat, colonisation, trading, etc) are complete so I’m dubious, even if this KS succeeds, that IdeaLCenter will be able to meet their new (2 year overdue) December 2015 target date with a finished, polished (Polished?) game.

      As a backer myself, I rather hope they do manage it but some of the items offered in this KS as stretch goals could have been implemented as post-release patches or DLC (higher-level backers can get 50% or 100% discount on future DLC). I’d feel more confident if they now focused on getting M.O.R.E. released rather than continuing the feature-creep.

      • Klaus says:

        “This I think is going to be the biggest issue – balancing and playtesting game systems to ensure that playing M.O.R.E. is challenging and fun.”

        But balancing is not what I meant. Many people can develope this or that game system and balance it out. Thats important but not the pinnacle of game design. No, I meant the rule mechanics. For example damage soaking and damage values ranging from fixed damage to variable. I meant using low numbers for damage and hit points instead of the usual video game high numbers. I meant the number of movement squares a ship can travel per turn in tactical combat in relation to its size and so on.

        All these combined mini factors are necessary for a good game (not only video game). Most video games today pay much attention to grafics, interface and balancing but not to eg clear and transparent numbers and well thought out game rules and their combination. And thats why there has never been a real successor to MOO2.

        Steven Barcia is a boardgame fan too and his excellent knowledge about boardgaming enabled him to develope classical masterpieces like MOO2, 1830 or MoM – all of them have boardgame roots. So he knows not only alot about designing good video games. His true skill lies in having a deeper knowledge about general game design.

  16. Dale Clouston says:

    One MORE Legend of Pegasus

  17. Smoking Robot says:

    ‘Endless Legend’ 1.0 released this morning.

    • Ermdog says:

      Yes, and Lords of the Black Sun released a few days ago too. So much to play!

      • chuki792 says:

        Lords of the black sun is SO not ready for release it’s not even funny! I think there is hope yet but you may need to wait a few months before its achieved it’s full potential… ive had it since alpha and I and many other backers were more than a little surprised at the stealth launch… many purchasers of the “release build” also agree… just check the steam community page.

        • Sam says:

          Yes I bought Lords of the Black Sun. I played for 10 minutes and then archeage was released and I havn’t been back since.

          Alas, so many games, so little time.


    • ashbery76 says:

      Awesome weekend.EndlessLegend,Rometw2 Emperor Edition and Wasteland2.

      I have lords too, but boy the game is bland.Not sure I will ever play it again.

  18. Ermdog says:

    I’ve never backed a Kickstarter campaign before, but seeing the new improvements makes me want to throw down some cash. I always wanted this game, but seeing how far it has come and the things that hopefully will be added, makes me want this even MORE. Sorry for bad pun.

    Graphics were never a big part of the game for me, but the improved graphics definitely helps. I was really interested in the extra music and alien dialog. Music has great power with me in these games and that’s what made MOO2 that much better, was the legendary soundtrack. Of course it all goes for nothing if the gameplay is garbage.

    All in all it looks way better then when I saw it last. Not much actual gameplay to see how things actually work, but I did see things from MOO2, like the drag and drop of colonists from one job to another. This is another company inspired by MOO2, and would seem they want to really make something just like it, but better. I hope they will actually be the company that delivers on a long awaited “clone” of MOO2

  19. stormcloud says:

    I remember myself idle chatting with my brother (over IM) on the state of several KS games about a year or two ago. Glancing at their public progress, figuring out the integrity of their devs from subtle cues and also looking at concepts and how they flesh out those concepts.

    MORE was one of the game which I had negative impression, right from the start:

    – The website had little information and the way it was written is like a port from a game design document. This indicates laissez faire work (i.e. they’re either inexperienced or don’t understand basic marketing).
    – The forum traffic isn’t encouraging, one of the indicators of interest. It isn’t a complete red flag, but it’s worrying. For first timers, finding details about the game in one page is like trying to locate a needle in haystack.
    – The game itself. Racial names looks like they’ve been computer generated than anyone putting any real thoughts behind them. Really!? They’ve also repeated the greatest UI mistake that Distant Worlds made with their unitelligible hard to read fonts.

    When you combine all of those above (and a few others I’ve left out from writing), an overall picture starts to coalesce. The picture is mess right from the start. The game concepts itself isn’t anything that stands out. It doesn’t appeal more than the other 4x titles out there.

    Said to my brother back then (remember this was years ago), this one is dead in the water .. or it will be sooner or later. I’m somewhat suprised they’re still looking for funding. It’s bordering unethical conduct.

    • IdeaLCenter says:


      – yes, we don’t put much attention to our website – we have too much work to do all the time. Also we can’t afford buying pro website, because we want to crete game – not websites. But still, thank you for your opinion, we know that we will have to change our www in the next year.
      – Forum was alive durin and after KS campaign. It should be alive again, after Alpha or release of game.
      – We’ve changed font already :) If you watched KS video, please see it on YouTube in full HD: Racial names.. hmmm.. it’s sad that you don’t like them, but it’ll be the smallest problem if the game is good, right? ;)

  20. SQW says:

    Passion and skill does not equal business acumen.

    Skill to manage the project properly is just essential to the completion of the game as programming/creative skills but rarely mentioned in majority of these ‘give us money’KS pages.

    Internal bickering, HR problems, lose of drive/passion after X years, financial mismanagement, unrealistic feature creep, lack of marketing, lack of community interaction, non-existent project time frame – any one of these can kill a game development let along one as complex and deep as proposed here.

    Problem with MORE isn’t lack of technical know-how but how the studio is being run and the decision making process. If I was the dev, I’d hunker down, strip away every non-essential part of the game and pump out the best Alpha I can with the $90,000 and let the public decide whether MORE is worth supporting further.

    The fact that they think this double dipping is a good idea leaves me gobsmacked.

  21. Sam says:

    Good Sirs;

    If you switch to javascript using the THREE.js library you still have a chance to keep up with shifting technology rather than coding for a platform that is rapidly shrinking as a percentage of the market. Those who are still coding in C++ or even C# for the PC are lost.

    Older programmers are also locked into the class and object inheritance paradigm–unfortunately if you bicker too long you not only lose focus you very development foundations erode.

    Just my 2 cents (but not my 50 bucks this time).


    • DrBalthar says:

      Except that not a single AAA game is written in JavaScript you might want to widen your horizon a bit.

      • salvo says:

        Does JavaScript support developing games not executing in a browser?

        • JD says:

          That depends. Javascript runs in a virtual machine. Browsers have VM’s built in. Some javascript libraries indeed allow you to create executables, but in these cases the javascript is “translated” into machine code via JIT compilation.

          As far as I know all javascript VMs are coded in C++ or C. Further more all graphics api’s have direct access via C++ and C. All other languages require bindings or wrappers as they are also called.

          C++ generates the fastest machine code execution out of all programming languages, well perhaps besides some functional languages such as OCaml that are just as fast.

          Fast machine code execution is important in games. Games in terms of software are very diffcult pieces of software. In terms of data crunching.

          My advise for younger folks is to start by learing the principles of imperative programming through Pascal and C, although Pascal is sort of gone, it teaches the principle of programming very well. After that, learn a interpreted language called Python or Lua. It will teach you the difference between compiled and interpreted code. After that learn the basics of C++ and object oriented programming, after that… use your competence to grow as you please.

    • Zero says:

      This is wrong. C# is the primary language used by Unity, although you could use java if you were a masochist. And C++ powers the Unreal Engine and CryEngine.

      So I don’t see people using these languages as “lost” so much as “leading the way”.

      • JD says:

        I think he is meaning the usage of javascript as a core language instead if used as a scripting component.

        To put more context to your reply. C# is not the primary language used in Unity. The unity engine is written in C++, but one interfaces with unity’s component based object system, via C#, Boo (sort of python running on mono) or Unityscript (which is Unity’s adaption of ECMA Javascript)

        So when executing a Unity binary, you are acutually running a C++ program which’ behaviour is manipulated via C#, through the mono framework. As this is sort of slow, Unity is also looking into directly translating IL to C++ on mobile devices, perhaps even on desktop platforms. I’d say that Unity users are in for some exciting times in terms of even faster code execution.

        Personally I still prefer coding the old fashioned way. But I can see that using Unity and its component based object system with a very good GUI can provide massive benefits. I mean the production value of stardrive 2 is bizar good, when you realize it’s just one person building/coding it in Unity.

        I have one question though, if you happen to read this reply. Do you find using Unity a hinderence when you need to use a more procedural approach to creating content. As I have read sometimes that using these object based engines can be sort of a hinderence, as you need to do things the engine way or you need to hack your way around it.

        • Zero says:

          I’ve been using procedural methods to generate the “Ship boarding” type ground combats and it works great. Unity uses a Prefab system where you can create a single object, like a floor tile, and then save it out. When you create a level all you have to do is tell it where to place the tiles and it will spawn them all perfectly.

          That’s the simplest case really. For planets and solar systems and all the other stuff, I use master template objects and once I instantiate them, I’ll fill them in with the procedural data to customize them.

          So in short, I’ve found it to be a real breeze to create procedural content.

        • JD says:

          Thank you for the anwser Zero and I must admit that my expierence is with older versions of Unity mainly 2.6 – 3.2, so I can imagine a lot has changed to accomodate procedural content creation or even managing the prefabs.

          I will say this out of all the engines I do find unity’s gameobject concept very strong and easy to pick up on.

      • Mark says:

        As someone who’s strongly considering working with Unity myself, I’d love to hear the answer to JD’s question since I have wondered about it too.
        EDIT: Thanks for the answer, got in 1min ahead of my post. :)

        Also – in terms of execution speed – how does C# coding in Unity compare with managed C# coding in a normal dev environment? Is there a big difference? Negligible?

        • JD says:

          Most likely a little slower, case being that Unity’s C# runs on top of the mono runtime instead of .net

          And .net is faster then mono.

          But Unity has the runtime embedded in your build. So no need to install frameworks, as you would need to do with .net

          And we all know how fickle .net installs can be :-P and when it goes wrong that stuff usually corrupts a lot of other stuff. Arghh you just reminded me how much I hate .net I do not mind C# as a language, it’s actually a very good language, but those .net runtimes can really screw stuff up sometimes.

        • Mark says:

          Thanks for the answer, yes I expected as much, but like you I’m thinking that it wouldn’t be that much slower.

          And yes the embedded run-time is a big plus, nothing worse than having to screw around with multiple separate interdependent components.

          I’m getting very close to convincing myself to switch to Unity now although I think I’ll wait for the 4.6 release so I can take advantage of the new GUI features.

    • Wodzu says:

      And it is better than I’ve expected! :)

      • salvo says:

        yep, I like look and atmosphere of the galaxy and system view. Let’s hope they manage to make the parts fit together into the working system and implement an AI which is capable of dealing with the complexity.

  22. Pankratos says:

    So far it reminds me of MoO3 visually. And it’s a compliment, ’cause I love MoO3 much.

    • David Carron says:

      I think that is Exactly what everyone is afraid of.

    • Happy Corner says:

      David Carron is right. “I love MoO3 much” is definitely NOT a sentence you often see on this site (or elsewhere!).

    • ACEofHeart says:

      hehe,, as some have mentioned, relating any game to MOO3 is a kiss of death as many rate it near the top of the most disappointing sequels of all time. The MOO3 developers starting on the outside fringe, worked inward and hoped everything would meet in the middle.
      We all found out it doesn’t work that way. You need a basic game foundation and add on as you go..
      The fact that M.O.R.E. after an initial successful kickstarter doesn’t even have a completed beta basic game that gamers/testers can judge at this point is troubling to say the least.

    • Mark says:

      There *was* no MOO3, it was never made. At least that’s what I try to tell myself. I really hope that MORE ends up nothing like that non-existent sequel.

      • Happy Corner says:

        Mark, you are almost right. Some of the developers’ posts leading up to the game made it clear that they had no interest in just making an “updated” version of MOO2. They were determined to make a different kind of space 4X game, and slapped the MOO name on as an afterthought. In the end, MOO3’s braindead AI and questionable design decisions sank it, but it’s tempting to think that – if the game had a different name – it might not have been received *quite* as harshly as it was.

        • Mark says:

          I think you’re right, it wouldn’t have been received as harshly, it would just have been ignored as yet another anonymous failure with abysmal game design, albeit a particularly horrible example of such.

          Instead it went down in infamy as the sequel that killed the MOO franchise. That’s the real reason for many people’s harsh reaction. We’ve had to wait many years for a sequel to MOO2 and thanks to the MOO3 train wreck, we’re still waiting…..

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          We hope that you’ll get this feeling of MOO2 successor with M.O.R.E. .. as we here are big fans of this game. Our game – yes, it’s different.. but also you’ll have nice features which will remind you about good old Moo series. For example assigning people to jobs (which you’ll see in Video Update 3)

        • Mark says:

          @ IdeaLCenter,

          I don’t think anyone – including myself – either expects or wants a 1:1 clone of MOO2. But *IF* M.O.R.E ends up channeling even a little of MOO2’s broad ideas and amazing emergent game-play, then I think you will end up selling more units than you know what to do with as MOO-starved customers flock to your game in droves.

          That’s a big *IF* though and many have tried and failed, most notably Stardrive. I’ll be looking forward to reading several favorable reviews on the final release that will inevitably compare M.O.R.E. to MOO2 before I make up my mind and I wish you the best of luck in achieving your goals.

          PS: For the love of God, whatever you do, don’t channel MOO3!

      • Gary says:

        Kind of like “Highlander” never had any sequels made? :)

  23. hakkarin says:

    The game does look good graphically, but I did not really see much gameplay in that video. I am also disturbed by how they say the game is in pre-alpha. How can the game not even be in an alpha state after 2 years? Where did the money go???

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      You’ll see more of our gameplay in next updates. Maybe not next – because it will be about main menu settings, but subsequent will be about other gameplay aspects.

      It’s not easy to create such complex game as M.O.R.E. especially with so small team and low budget. Anyway, we are close to first Pre-Alpha fully playable version now. Our Alpha should be avaiable in the on of this year, but our official date for our Alpha is Q1 2015.

  24. Gary says:

    I think the first Dev video update is very impressive, and I look forward to seeing the rest of them.

    I’ve backed many KS video game projects, and none of them have completed on time. Even Wasteland 2 was a year late. I’d rather have a good game late, than a bad game early.

    • SQW says:

      MORE devs are not saying they are delaying the game to make it better; it’s saying, give us more money or it’ll never get done because we woefully overestimated our ability and underestimated the cost.

      Considering they don’t even have a basic framework of a game to show from their last KS, what’s stopping them from asking for a 3rd, 4th KS? Show their backers the alpha at Q1 2015 and let the public be the judge of its worthiness.

      Remember, it’s easy selling a dream to people. Doubly so when the people are desperately wanting to believe.

      • IdeaLCenter says:

        Where we are saying something like that? Please give us a link, or otherwise don’t spread the false, bad informations please.

        Our game will be finished anyway, but with a little bigger budget we will be able to maintaing high quality of production.

        Also you can see our gameplay here:

        We were selling dreams in 2012. Now after 21 months of work, we have almost working game prototype. Without support from community, we’ll never be here. So now, we are trying to reach other people who can also support us.

        • salvo says:

          please, don’t get me wrong but your wording suggests that if the new KS fails and/or any of the stretch-goals are not reached, the ‘quality of the game production’ will fall, whereas you previously stated that the new KS is only intended to raise additional funds to add some new functionality and not to ensure the completion of the game as a high quality product.

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          Maybe there is language barrier. I’ll try to explain once more, this time on an example.

          We will create M.O.R.E. anyway, but during process of creation we saw places where we can do better. Like diplomatic/spying/espionage rooms. We can have that as they are, or add them great SFX, additional visual animated effects, and for example text “translations” from alien to english. But for this we need: graphic designer, sfx specialist and visual effects specialist.

          So… if we will be able to raise our budget, there will be place for this (and others) kind of upgrades which will make our game better.

          As you can see it’s far from SQW wrote: “give us more money or it’ll never get done”. And that’s not true.

      • Gary says:

        SQW, you apparently haven’t read their second Kickstarter. I will quote:

        “The most important thing though, is that our main target isn’t threatened in any way. Even if this campaign doesn’t succeed, we promise that you will still see M.O.R.E. released. This will just make it better.

        We really don’t want to release this game without them, but the creation of these new features requires additional work. Here are the modules / adjustments which we want to add to our game with your support:”

        That seems very clear to me.

        • SQW says:

          “You can either settle for this bland product A or if you are willing to pay a little more, you can get this AMAZING, WIZZBANG product B with ALL the bells and whistles you’ve ever wanted! Surely you wouldn’t want this bland product A would you?”

          Right now it’s all vague promises and letting our imagination and expectation fill in the gap and suddenly everyone’s seeing their own perfect game in MORE.

          1. They have not listed actual aspects of the new, improved system. Saying they have a vision for a better diplomacy, more involved combat etc means nothing without details of what they have now and what extras they want to add.

          2. Without a breakdown of how this extra $10,000 will be spent in terms of man-hour, equipment hire etc, how is this different from lumping this extra cash to the other $90k and just give us one version of the game – it’s not like we have anything to compare to.

          3. Why not wait for this purported alpha demo before launching the 2nd KS? Is there a deadline? It’s like telling your boss your project is running behind schedule but don’t don’t worry, it’ll still be done. By the way, I don’t have anything solid to show yet but if you give me a bit more money, I can make this currently-nothing even BETTER.

      • DrBalthar says:

        I think IdealCenter have been really lucky to launch their first campaign during a period where there was still a lot of euphoria on/about Kickstarter and people where throwing money on nearly any promising game project.

        If they would have started their full campaign today I doubt they would reach their funding goal even with a 50 days period. I probably wouldn’t back it myself today!

        • SQW says:

          Their initial KS vid showed over DOZEN ship categories.
          Holy ****! If that’s not fan-service pandering, I don’t know what is.

          To code an AI that can effectively utilize all these ship types in the strategic map would be beyond ANY studios right now. If each category of ship is just straight up better instead of having a unique, dedicated role, that would just be infantile game design.

          Either way, I had very little hopes for MORE when I first saw it and this 2nd KS hasn’t boosted my confidence either.

        • Mark says:

          All this negativity is completely pointless. Lets just wait and see what they *do* come up with rather than telling them – and everyone else – that its impossible. Its not as if MORE is the only 4x on the horizon.

          If you just keep a tight hold on your wallet and wait for a release then you cant possibly be ripped off and might very well be pleasantly surprised. Or not. Time will tell.

        • SQW says:

          It’s not being negative by giving this game a critical analysis. You’d be wary too if you ignore all the words about what will happen and just look at the history of what has been done.

          We 4x gamers are so desperate for a good space 4x we are willing to try anything and everything in the slime hope that one might turn out to be MOO2. However, even if the individual cost of supporting your ‘dream’ game is just a good meal, the overall effect is that KS has had to update its contract T/C now pc games start being kickstarted.

          When our blasé attitude toward how we invest our money feeds this toxic environment, legitimate indie devs with skill AND a solid business plan will have to compete with all the fly-by-wire, over promising, fund-as-we-go DF-9ers which ultimately hurts us gamers.

        • IdeaLCenter says:


          How can you tell what have been done so far, as you didn’t see our other video updates? There is only 1st with our galaxy, and as you saw (I hope you at least saw our video) there is enought features to talk about it for over 20 minutes. If our game will be pure 2D, it will be at least 4-5 months further in developement.

          We needed backers support, because we didn’t want to have any boss over us, telling us that we have to hurry to release some bad game too early. You mentioned 2 things which aren’t in advanced state in our game (diplomacy and space battles). Also we won’t tell about every aspect of our game which we are creating now.

          All money collected in KS will be spend to taxes hiring people.

        • ChrisB says:

          “Their initial KS vid showed over DOZEN ship categories.
          Holy ****! If that’s not fan-service pandering, I don’t know what is.”

          This is the very definition of feature creep. Its a product of over promising to crowd funders. Its no wonder this can’t be delivered on time as the project keeps ballooning.
          Which is unfortunate as many of the features look very promising! Its a mistake to think you can make the perfect game on your first attempt, if they could release a playable version with even half of what i’ve seen they would have no problem getting enough $ for sequels or expansions.

        • salvo says:

          I don’t know. Let’s wait and see. As far as I know, Distant World was developed bay a single guy, and it’s a rather complex game

      • AstralWanderer says:

        @SQW: “Their initial KS vid showed over DOZEN ship categories…To code an AI that can effectively utilize all these ship types in the strategic map would be beyond ANY studios right now.”

        Just coding an effective AI seems to be beyond most studios. :( However an effective (and flexible) AI shouldn’t find large numbers of ship categories a problem (Space Empires V had nearly 30 categories if you included fighter, weapon platform, ground unit and drone classes). The way to proceed is by having an adaptive AI that can figure the most effective counter to whatever the player (and other AIs) comes up with.

        One way of doing this with ship design is to have a selection of pre-made designs for each race. The AI then runs a combat simulator (multiple times at higher levels) to judge which design (for a specific tech/size/cost) performs best against a player, and selects the winner. That provides distinctive gameplay (each AI having a different tapestry of designs to draw from, which could place emphasis on specific technologies) with an ability to adapt to player tactics.

        • Mark says:

          “Just coding an effective AI seems to be beyond most studios. :( ”

          Lol, aint that the truth. Gal Civ was the only one with a decent AI but I couldn’t stand the boring, simplistic non-interactive combat which is probably what allowed the AI to be so effective in the first place.

          It seems that game devs are unable to program an AI that can handle more than kindergarten-level complexity? And even that level of AI competence is the exception rather than the rule.

  25. Joel says:

    Wow! That video looks wonderful! I can’t wait!

    Question: will MORE Have a tutorial?

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      Yes, we will have some kind of tutorial… and idea of it is already in our heads. And it’ll be better to go through, as you’ll have many “hidden features” which will help you to manage our game easily.

  26. JD says:

    This looks like a modern 3D version of Stars!

    Color me suprised.

    Although I will admit that I actually never play games of such detail, I tend to like the simpler mechanical ones.

  27. ACEofHeart says:

    well , all talk about additional kickstarters aside for a moment. I do like the design of what I see so far. A “clean” looking main interface and an actual feel of traveling among the stars is something I’ve seen lacking in most 4X space games since MOO2.. You do not need every detail of info on the main interface. Some games are so cluttered with data they have blocked 50% of viewing on the main interface and totally made the playing experience not about space but about number crunching. :(

  28. chuki792 says:

    On vacation in sunny Cyprus reading all these posts and wondering, if they would have something, anything playable to show for their first kickstarter then a lot of these points would be moot. As it stands they are asking for more money when they’ve yet to show anything that was achieved from their first campaign… For me and it seems many others, this just makes my wallet want to run and hide.

  29. csebal says:

    @IdeaLCenter wrote in reaction to SQW’s post:
    “How can you tell what have been done so far, as you didn’t see our other video updates? There is only 1st with our galaxy, and as you saw (I hope you at least saw our video) there is enought features to talk about it for over 20 minutes.”

    I did watch that video and I would like my 20 minutes back, please. You remind me of the lazy student, who did not prepare his homework and instead of talking about how his homework AI driven RC car project works, he goes into detail about how hard it is to get the right shade of plastic for the doors or how the wheels are round so that the RC car can roll on it.

    The though of watching 7 more videos of utter nothingness scares me, especially since you plan on dedicating the next one to the marvelous and highly interesting MENU SYSTEM. WHAT?

    In the video you did show a
    – 3D galaxy map, which in my eyes is no better than say SOTS’s.
    – fleet movement that is not special in any way, other than it not being done yet, as there is no game logic behind to drive it.
    – Star system maps that were of no special interest
    – Cinematic view, that – while looked decent – was utterly pointless at that point
    – Sector view and empire influence view that made my eyes bleed

    I can see that you have the groundwork for a decent strategic engine, aesthetically pleasing menu system, but I still have not seen even just a glimpse from your game.

    I do not know about others, but I am not interested in you talking about the grass growing (or in this case the pixels getting illuminated by the light from a background light source passing through some liquid crystals controlled by a thin film of transistors underneath, that magically cause the EXIT GAME menu item to appear in your game)

    I am only really interested in the cold hard facts and even then, only just the summary version of those. (thats what I have time for, really) To recap:

    – What have you done so far, in bullet point format?
    (Yes, you can add “cool galaxy and solar system map” to the list)

    – What are the features you are still planning on doing?

    – Why have you missed the original deadline, what have you learned from it and how do you plan on avoiding it in the future?

    Also I would revisit the idea about videos. Especially if the next video is really just about the menu system. Think of this: LESS is often MORE.

    • IdeaLCenter says:

      You can see our “bullet time video” here: It’s all what we achieved so far, and the game is in almost playable version now. Some people liked to know more about our production, and how our galaxy works.

      Our next features will be to finish this part of a game, add multiplayer support and then release playable multiplayer pre-alpha version. After it we will move on to next goals.

      We are late, because we’re not aware of how much time, we will spend on polishing details, that there will be small game engine problems, and of course – we want to create interesting game, not only fulfill Kickstarter obligations and go away. It’s not our goal.

      • salvo says:

        so the playable pre-alpha version will not have any AI?

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          We preffer to make good things.. not to have something from which you won’t be happy. Our main goals are playable single sandbox mode/multi > ALPHA > add space battles > BETA > add AI > GAME

          Also we create AI with idea of space sector member – Wodzu as separate part of game. So.. if there will be some talented modder, he will be able to upgrade it :)

        • Wodzu says:

          Way to go guys! I am sure that if the game itself will be good and API for AI will be good, then talented people will develop interesting AI modules :)

        • Neil says:

          “so the playable pre-alpha version will not have any AI?”

          It seems from IdeaLCenter’s response that the beta will have no AI – lol.

          You should have been designing, coding and testing the AI from the beginning. Treating the AI as an afterthought in a complex 4x game is not a good sign for this game…

        • Neil says:

          “Way to go guys! I am sure that if the game itself will be good and API for AI will be good, then talented people will develop interesting AI modules :)”

          I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic?

          This is not an open source project, it is a commercial game. It is not acceptable to release a 4X with awful AI and expect modders to fix it.

        • salvo says:

          well, as I’m not a game developer mayself, I can’t say if creating the AI at a final stage is the usual approach, but it reminds me that when GC3 beta was released on EA it was stated that work on the AI was just about to start

        • Neil says:

          OK, fair point. Still, I’m sure that stardock have a lot more experience and an existing AI code base to work from. More importantly, hey don’t seem to have an attitude of relying on modders to fix it.

        • Happy Corner says:

          Salvo is right – coding the AI right from the start isn’t really feasible. Because the AI needs a game to work with, and every time you add a feature (or drastically change an already-existing one), it’s probably something that you will have to teach the AI how to use. It makes sense that most (not all, but most) of the real work on an 4X game’s AI would come towards the end.

        • IdeaLCenter says:

          AI needs some data, so it’ll be able to change. How we can create AI without game engine and all options ready? Work on AI will start just after ALPHA version, but in beta if there will be AI, it will be only basic.

          Are we saying that we are relying on modders? No. We’ve plan to create good AI – that’s why we don’t create it now. But also as our community suggested we won’t hard code our AI into gamecode, but create separate module with it instead. We thought it’s good idea and we plan to do so.

        • Neil says:

          I was being excessive when I said coding from the very beginning. However, you don’t need to wait until the game is in beta to begin AI work. Your AI must be written do that you can easily adapt it to later changes in the code in patches/expansions/etc. Furthermore, there are many aspects of the game for which the AI will be self contained modules or that the AI doesn’t depend on at all.

          Anyway, if the plan is to create a high quality AI at release, then I am happy. Coding AI is very challenging, so it will need to be in beta for a long time, if that is when the serious AI work is to commence.

        • AstralWanderer says:

          @IdeaLCenter: “…Our main goals are playable single sandbox mode/multi > ALPHA > add space battles > BETA > add AI > GAME

          Also we create AI with idea of space sector member – Wodzu as separate part of game. So.. if there will be some talented modder, he will be able to upgrade it :)”

          While a moddable AI (and moddable game generally) is a good thing, an effective AI is highly complex to program – it will likely be the most complicated part of your project. So it is unrealistic to expect modders to be able to “fix” a weak AI and downright irresponsible to leave AI programming to so late in development. You *are* supposed to be offering a game with single-player functionality and that means the AI should be worked on from alpha onwards, with continual enhancements needed as the game develops. And some game systems may need to be scaled back to be workable for an AI (though hopefully you won’t need to dumb things down as much as Stardock did with GalCiv 2).

          Doing it the way you propose will mean an embarrassingly weak AI which may never be fixable, relegating M.O.R.E. to multiplayer use only. Now there are good and successful MP games out there – but arranging, playing and finishing a complex MP game requires significant player commitment which is why I, along with others here, really want M.O.R.E. to offer an adequate single-player experience.

        • Wodzu says:

          Strange but my original reply was not published, some bug perhaps with the interface.

          @Neil I was dead serious, I support that idea.

          I think you are drawing wrong conclusions here – beeing able to create custom A.I. module does not mean that IdeaLCenter will not create their own module.

          This is just a possibility, a great occasion to improve the game. I am a realistic guy, I expect that A.I. will suck at the begining because that is the hardest part to create. We all know that. We can show like 3 games in which A.I. does not suck or has been fixed becasue it was stupid. And those games are made by large studios.

          So.. lets just assume that they will make a decent A.I. What is wrong to have more choices? Different A.I. personalities and playstyles? This will only add value to the game.

  30. Gary says:

    So many posts here remind me of Oddball in “Kelly’s Heroes”: “Always with the negative waves Moriarty, always with the negative waves.”

    Maybe I’m just an optimist, or maybe I’m hopeful because of the 59 projects I’ve backed (since the beginning of 2012), the only project that failed was “Haunts: The Manse Macabre,” but I think IdeaLCenter will release “M.O.R.E.” and in good condition.

    • salvo says:

      I, too, have backed quite a few of KS projects, and so far, there has only been one which has ‘failed’. The development has been put on hold because of health problems in the developer’s family. To me it’s mostly a way to support people developping games i’m interested in and which otherwise would not be made. Of course, it involves always a risk, as anything in life, but there hasn’t been a single case so far I felt my confidence betrayed. I’m sure the guys producing MORE are willing to deliver the best possible game. Let’s hope they achieve what they want to accomplish.

      • Joel says:

        I, on the other hand, have only backed this Kick Starter Project. It seems to promise everything I’ve been looking for. Other developing games [or even released games] have some of what I’m looking for but not all.

        If IdeaLcenter can pull this off, I’ll be one happy camper!

  31. Chuki792 says:

    Just want to say, despite (or in spite of) the varied comments, how good it is to see a dev engage so much with their audience… It’s turned out to be quite a Q&A :-)

  32. Benji says:

    So much negativity! I for one am really looking forward to this game, and I wish the devs the best of luck.

  33. Gary says:

    Video Update 4 – Space objects and colonies list. Science and Leaders screens.

    Video Update 5 – Information, espionage, diplomacy and government screens.

    • csebal says:

      Yea.. the screens look all nice and shiny.

      If MORE turns out to be more than what I expect now, I will be as happy as the rest of ya.

      There is an interesting discussion between a guy named Quantomas and the developers in the comments for video update 5, about AI development. Just a few posts, but its interesting nonetheless.

  34. no says:

    I’m not sure I really want to spend more money on a game I already spent $20 on over two years ago and still haven’t seen.

    • Kreissig says:

      Save your money then Mr. “no”. I am an Alpha-level backer and will make up the difference with my donations. Since I am paid by taxpayer money…I like the idea of sending some of it to Katowice. hahaha….from dollars to Zloty!

  35. Wolf789 says:

    Nice to see Zero here.
    I salute you ! :)
    Now that’s a man who managed to pull off 2 really good games ( though StarDrive 1 could’ve used more stuff …but that’s another story not to be discussed here )
    From some experience with these guys i got to tell you i’ve been a member in their forums and they had a guy there some smart ass that was rejecting sound ideas i gave them for all their 20 civilizations.
    Most people who wrote upstairs are kinda right.
    I smelled the same thing about these folks that they’re spending the money they get and not working on the game.

    IMO they made two main mistakes : 1 being that they’re trying to copy Master of Orion
    Really really seriously speaking i think a true MOO follower can/would be made only by the guys who worked on MOO 1 and 2 themselves
    It really pisses me off that many 4x titles try to copy MOO but fail to deliver their own game in their own right.
    Maybe some people won’t agree because sure we’d love a true MOO follower but i say : screw this idea ! let new 4x titles be their own game.

    The second mistake is that they’ve bitten more than they can chew.
    Sure an average jogger can think he can win the athletics olympics but chances are in most cases that he won’t.
    I think they should’ve started with a smaller project that would’ve required less money ( cuz affecting your backers trust , your public is really bad you know ) but a project that would’ve been ready since 1 year ago
    I was really surprised that i didn’t find the game anywhere.
    They won’t get any cash from me because i’m a guy who plays demo first and then thinks if he will get the game that is from version 1.0 further.
    You can’t really expect to pay for a half finished product and be happy about it man.

    There’s absolutely no problem if you guys can’t handle it.
    Please release the game to someone who can get it done.
    And …personally speaking , i think M.O.R.E can exist ( unlike someone from here i LOVED the races concepts especially and would really love to see them in action playing against or with )
    but most likely if it would be worked on by a pro studio.
    The game has the feel to become an AAA title not just an indie game because the concept is amazing but if the execution is bad ..there goes the neighbourhood.

    I’ll keep an eye on it , i really wanna play it soon be it alpha or whatever its state but i don’t put many hopes in it.
    Besides , these guys ( and i don’t mean to offend the team ) can barely speak english and that’s not professional at all , so , ah , yeah ! i wanna be surprised like really surprised with this game.

    I’d gladly pay for the finished product and problem is mr Kreissig that not all of us live on taxpayer money.
    Most of us are the taxpayers.
    Nothing personal but i hate politics and politicians and i’d rather not mix them with video games i’d like to play.

    Good luck IdealCentre and i wish you can release the ideal game M.O.R.E.

    • SQW says:

      It’ll either quietly disappear in the next 6 months or exists as an example of rubbish indie shovelware riding on the last train out of the KS bonanza.

      The alpha release has been delayed time and time again for well over a year now and the latest release date is Q1 2015 which is fast approaching. However, a quick glance in the forum shows the threads are dead; hardly anyone’s posting anything and the one dev that’s on forum duty hasn’t posted anything substantial or game related for weeks – hardly the type of excitement that precludes a major mile stone.

      Fools and their money.

  36. Wolf789 says:

    Yeah and money you donate is money you give away without ever hoping you’ll get it back even if people who gave away their money would deserve it back.

    Maybe we got ahead of ourselves thinking we’d been fooled….maybe !
    I don’t wanna discourage the team into not making the game and i’m sure nobody wants this because if things go bad later they might use this as an excuse ” well if you just bashed us and discouraged us we bailed on the game ”

    Let’s not go that far of course but we sure need to play that alpha really soon.

    Let’s wait and see…let’s wait and see but if this time ,if this time ! they won’t release the game then it’ll be all clear that they took people’s money for personal use.

    If this happens it will really make people’s trust backing up future sound indie games who might be great and the real deal ,fade away one more step which is too bad.
    Other titles will suffer and that’s not quite fair but the same gag can’t go on forever you know.

    I can name many titles i’d love to see finished , one would be Folk’s Tale but they don’t seem to get worked on anymore or something like that which is downright dissapointing.

    In a way it’s better the good old way : wait for big companies to release a game , buy it from version 1.0 and that’s it.
    Besides, a bought game has some chance that you’ll get your money back if returned but not in the present case.

    In my vision i think games who are funded beforehand should work on an on-demand system.

    You get a crowd of people voting things you wanna see in the game then the devs will work exactly on that which is what people asked.
    Let’s say there’s a limit of 1000 ideas max so if you get to post your ideas among those 1000 people, your ideas will be taken for serious and will be implemented in the game for certain and once this is settled you’re asked : Ok my backer this might cost a 100 $ donation.Take it or leave it if you want your ships to fire green rays and not just red ones like we intended at first.

    This would be fine by me and maybe not just me because i find it a just idea that if you want my money before you make the game then you’ll make what i want inside it , be it whatever little the difference or feature but i pay for that right ? and then i pay one more time for the finished game when i buy it right?
    Sounds really fair to me but things aren’t this way it seems.
    Maybe in the future things will be this way….or not

    Maybe i’m not making big sense here but i think the system with these games should become more trustworthy and making sure you’ll get the bang for your buck after a reasonable time period too.

    Sure there’s passion in indie games , there’s vision too , talent as well maybe , imagination but these first ingredients alone can’t deliver a satisfying finished product.
    You can’t just dream a new game and that’s it , you also have to make it real up to the last step.
    You need to be punctual , serious , open to new ideas from your public , sincere at all times regarding what you’re currently working on at it and working hard with a constant schedule plus some experience over there to pull of a good product.
    So, people who wanna make indie games should not fail at either of these requirements i think.

    The only thing i’m interested in M.O.R.E is those 20 races.
    You hardly find so many in other 4x titles ( except Distant Worlds of course which is an amazing game but bad graphics at least for me and that sort of ruins it for me at least ) and the way they say they’ll work makes you really wanna play this game.
    I’m talking about promised interface which is unique for each , sounds , music , their way of speech etc.
    I’d like that diverse uniqueness in a game who wouldn’t.
    It’s an idea of theirs that everyone likes.

    I hate when a game is presented great , plays great and stuff but all races there ships/buildings etc look the darn same – i just hate it but that’s another story.

    I admit i’m not at all interested in how much M.O.R.E the game will be similar to MOO.
    Not at all.

    All i want is to play a modern , present day 4x title that delivers the good stuff ranging from graphics to scope to depth to diversity to really good gameplay and why not a good story driven campaign too.
    Since Star Trek Armada 2 and Galactic Civilizations 2 i haven’t enjoyed a space story in an rts or 4x game.
    I feel like i need a space story really bad.

    Personally i’m really looking forward to Galactic Civilizations III ,StarDrive 2 and the finished version of Star Lords 2 which is yet another good title as well.
    Those three games i’ll gladly buy and play the heck out of my time.
    If M.O.R.E makes it even if quite late by now , i’ll gladly play it too.

    Let us become calm in the hope of example given by Blizzard who released StarCraft sequel after a decade and they managed to do the right thing too.
    Let us hope that this is the case for M.O.R.E too, that if we wait then Ideal Center will deliver us an even more polished and fullfilling game than if it was released earlier.

    And i’d like to be pointed towards a video or pictures with an up to date tech tree of M.O.R.E
    I’m really curious about it

    Anyway, you’ll always have my moral and spiritual support for this game :)

  37. Wolf789 says:

    And one thing , the last thing i’ll say for now about this game or for good is that in one spot i agree with IdealCenter way of thinking.
    90k is not big money at all to make a game , not really.
    This is just a brand new luxury SUV cash in terms of real world you know.

    I’m sure they need more to make M.O.R.E. ( sorry for the pun )

    Personally i’d pour 1 million into a game this scope to see it work the way it intends to be
    But this most likely not being worked on by them but only by a professional studio of a big company.
    Only that way i see the game seeing the light of day being the way it wants to be.

    • SQW says:

      An actual studio needs to pay its programmers regardless how good the end product is so the onus is on the studio to get sh*t together.

      Indies don’t have the money so they are basically working for free and living off 2min noodles in the hope their baby will be the next FTL or Plant vs Zombie.

      But here’s the thing, if you KNOW your game is only mediocre with lackluster sales, why would you waste any more of your life finishing it? What’s the downside? Your name isn’t recognized anyway and your company brand/reputation is essentially worthless in the first place. WHY would anyone spend another 6 months doing something he/she doesn’t believes in for no monetary gain?

      • Mark says:

        I don’t think you ever really KNOW for sure, there’s always a chance. These people get emotionally invested and hope/pray that their brand new lemon will be the next Minecraft or MOO2 even though any outsider could quickly tell them otherwise. They learn not to listen to any criticism and just hope for the best.

        And we end up paying (both in cash and frustration) unless we read lots of reviews beforehand.

        • SQW says:

          Idealcentre can stick its head in sand or lava for all I care. I do, however, take issue with people who choose to fund this project. That first pitch video with over a dozen ship categories (god, what gamer would think that’s a good game design) should have rang all sorts of alarm bells. The ‘we promise you everything’ approach should never have worked yet it did. TWICE!

          If these shovelware projects keep getting funded, they’ll poison the crowd-funding ecosystem, make people more weary of new projects and ultimately take away legitimate funding opportunity for real devs.

        • AstralWanderer says:

          @SQW: “I do, however, take issue with people who choose to fund this project. That first pitch video with over a dozen ship categories (god, what gamer would think that’s a good game design) should have rang all sorts of alarm bells.”

          Why? Other games offer more categories (Space Empires being a particular example) so it’s perfectly feasible for a game to have enough scope to justify that number.

          If you’re talking about people choosing to support a project with such a low funding target, then how does their choice with their money negatively affect bystanders like yourself? If it is never released or comes out unplayable, you’ll know from the reviews and can avoid it. If it turns out great, you have the option to play it.

          People support crowdfunding projects because the current publisher-driven market isn’t providing what they want particularly when it comes to in-depth games. Without Kickstarter, we wouldn’t have FTL, Malevolence, Legends of Eisenwald or Xenonauts and these projects had targets equal to or less than M.O.R.E. (FTL’s $10,000 target makes M.O.R.E.’s $50,000 seem epic as does Malevolence’s $6,000). These examples should show that a low target is no reliable indicator of a mediocre game.

        • SQW says:

          I wasn’t talking about funding targets but MORE’s original pitch video. MORE should never have been funded given the laughable goal (we give you EVERYTHING!) and design elements (over a dozen ship categories ffs) in their original pitch video while having no solid game design background/history.

          Do you think in 2015 it is easier or harder for a legit KS project to achieve proper funding after the last two years of public failures? Legit projects now have to seriously consider NOT how much it’ll take to finish the game but how much can they get to get to the KS funding threshold. How many 4x players out there are willing to support this genre after being burnt a few times? How many of them have the spare cash lying around AFTER supporting obvious mediocre efforts like MORE?

          I support the KS scene which is why I want the crowd funding scene to be as ‘clean’ as possible and NOT seeing obvious shovelware projects getting funded twice by lazy gamers who gets easily suckered by slick sales pitch – god help them if they ever walk past a get-rich-quick seminar.

      • AstralWanderer says:

        “I wasn’t talking about funding targets but MORE’s original pitch video. MORE should never have been funded given the laughable goal (we give you EVERYTHING!) and design elements (over a dozen ship categories ffs) in their original pitch video while having no solid game design background/history.”

        The pitch video wasn’t that ambitious – just offering more over Master of Orion 2 which, while a well-balanced game in its day, would seem lacking in scope compared to current major TBS games like the Civilization, Space Empires or Dominions series.

        Of course, judging a project by its pitch video is rather like judging a book by its cover or a game by its graphics. The project detail is more significant and I generally use that, not the videos, to judge the likely value of a project.

        “Do you think in 2015 it is easier or harder for a legit KS project to achieve proper funding after the last two years of public failures?”

        I’ve supported over 100 projects and can mention only three PC games that seem near total losses – Kinetic Void (creator has refused to provide a Steam-free build despite several requests), Unwritten That Which Happened (on indefinite hiatus) and Jack Houston (not even an alpha release date 1.5 years after the original deadline). Of course, whether a project is a failure or not depends on definition – virtually none meet their original estimates but many do still eventually provide what they promised.

        On the other hand, some “sucessful” projects failed to provide key aspects of what they promised (Elite Dangerous – which I didn’t back – failed on its DRM-free single-player offline commitment, Shadowrun Returns had initial problems with a public DRM-free release which were fixed).

        My personal gripe is with projects that see KS as a gateway to Steam Early Access and subsequently rely on Steam for alpha/beta releases (long list here – Worlds of Magic, The Dead Linger, Dead State, Grim Dawn, Wasteland 2) leaving backers who want nothing to do with Valve’s DRM/TOS out of the loop until final release.

        Balanced against those are the projects that finally delivered – Broken Sword 5, Battle Worlds Kronos, Dead State, Divinity Original Sin, Dungeon of Elements, Expeditions Conquistador, FTL, Legends of Aethereus, Malevolence, Ring Runner, Shadowrun Returns, The Banner Saga, Void Destroyer, Wasteland 2 and Xenonauts. And we have some high profile almost-sure successes on the way like Pillars of Eternity, Dreamfall Chapters and Torment Numenera.

        Is it harder for a PC game Kickstarter to succeed now? On balance probably yes since there are so many projects jostling for public attention. I personally don’t intend to support any more since I would want confirmation that they would run on my gaming platform of choice (32-bit WinXP). Does that mean that no project is worthy? Of course not – there will still be great ideas needing public support to become reality, but picking them out will be harder.

        “…I want the crowd funding scene to be as ‘clean’ as possible and NOT seeing obvious shovelware projects getting funded twice by lazy gamers who gets easily suckered by slick sales pitch…”

        If you think the pitch video is so important, then to put it bluntly, your judgment is no better than the “lazy gamers” you decry. The reality is no outsider can tell whether a project has adequate management or organisational skills and the only thing that can be verified is the track record (previous games, etc) of project creators and even these are not a guarantee (Old-School RPG, Thorvalla, Ars Magica). So no-one can be sure that any project will succeed, and while there are descriptions that say “stay away” like or any pledge is a risk.

        If your gripe on M.O.R.E. is them running a second KS, then please don’t overlook Vigrior, Worlds of Magic and Skyjacker. In such cases, as long as the project creators are honest about the reasons for more funding, it can mean a better result for all backers.

        M.O.R.E. are certainly late in delivery, but there’s clearly progress and anyone willing to write them off now should probably not bother with Kickstarter games in future. A good strategy game can easily take 3 or more years to produce and the best ones are often part of a series with 5+ years’ development behind it.

        • csebal says:

          My two cents here, not that anyone should (or likely does) care.

          Kickstarter is like communism. Just as communism is an utopian society, crowd funding is an utopian funding model. They both sound good on paper, however once you add humanity to the mix, with its greed and fallibility, you suddenly have a horrible nightmare of a system on your hands.

          The problem with crowd funding was, is and always will be the crowd. Crowds are stupid and unreliable, prone to making irrational decisions and easy to manipulate.

          Let me put it this way, if I were to tell you, that I have a dream of a great 4x game, that will have:
          – an infinite universe,
          – procedurally generated resource system down to the atomic elements,
          – procedurally generated technologies that are more meaningful than random tech name ,
          – infinite game mode, where new enemies are spawned into existance to challenge you as you play
          – crusader kings level diplomacy and role playing elements
          – complex espionage system and simulation of cultural aspects of managing a huge, multi-race empire
          – complex ship design with facings and whatnot
          – etc.. I could go on really.

          I have close to 50 pages of design documents detailing these systems down to the last formula on how they should work.

          Would you buy into that promise?

          If you did answer yes, then congratulations, you just bought a piece of shovelware or vaporware, because the items listed above will never work together. Yes, I did not lie, I actually designed those systems and came to the realization above after I have invested all that time into thinking everything through.

          I have it easy, because I did not ask anyone’s money to make my dream a reality, thus I am under no pressure to deliver something. Also I have over a decade of experience in designing computer software of various types and sizes, so I can tell if something will work or not, or how much effort it will take for me to do something. Thus, I can tell if an idea is viable or not.

          Evidence suggests, that the big majority of KS project owners
          a) do not have that experience
          b) are just not good enough
          c) do not care

          They start with projects that are doomed to fail at the start. This in itself would not be a problem, if there would be a filter on which projects are allowed and which are not, but that filter is sorely missing. The crowd itself cannot do the filtering, because it is inherently as dumb as its dumbest member and is extremely easy to manipulate.

          You cannot really expect Joe Average to be able to judge whether my idea is viable, and unless I am as honest about it as I am just now, trust me, I could sugar coat it and sell the idea to you just so you get hyped and buy into it.

          TL/DR version:
          Only people with real experience in making software or computer games do ever have a chance to make EDUCATED decisions on whether a project is viable or not, the rest are simply gambling. If you want to gamble with your money, then I would say you should rather go and play roulette. Your odds are significantly better there.

          This will not change until the start doing some sort of screening of projects by professionals before allowing them onto crowd funding platforms.

        • SQW says:

          The problem is KS has no penalty; it’s all up to poster’s conscience or how long that conscience can hold out in the face of mounting bills and obvious failure of his/her dream game. On the flip side, consumers are acting dumb and lazy and expect the industry to protect them. If we all KS a little smarter, there would be far fewer dregs for us to wade through.

          As a rule of thumb, we should all back off game more mechanically complex than FTL/Darkest Dungeon/Shovel Knight on KS unless the devs are ex industry veterans with a list of similar games under his/her belt.

          On a separate note. How any backers of M.O.R.E. here? How confident are you of the latest Q1 2015 deadline for the playable Alpha?

        • Mark says:

          @ Csebal,

          Cant really argue with most of your points except to say that there’s another way for an individual to rationally deal with crowd funding projects…..

          Just ignore them.

          Let the crowd fund them. Or not. Sit back, watch and wait. If the game is finally released then read lots of reviews, Read forums, listen to podcasts, watch YouTube let’s plays. Finally if you like it, buy the finished product knowing already that its good. If the whole thing crashes and burns or ends up a complete trainwreck then just snigger quietly and move on.

          Either way you end up with access to a small proportion of CF or EA games which would never have seen the light of day without those systems in place, and the impatient idiots get to pay for all the failures. Win win.

          So feel free to crowd fund your impossible game. I don’t care whether its viable or not because I wont be paying a cent for anything except the finished working product.

          Yes I realize that if everyone thought the way I did Crowd funding could never work, but as you pointed out it is a deeply flawed system and the only way to profit from a broken system is to never buy into it. And as you also mentioned….

          “Crowds are stupid and unreliable, prone to making irrational decisions and easy to manipulate.”

          And that’s one universal constant that will never change.

  38. Gary Vandegrift says:

    csebal and SQW, get a life. Until M.O.R.E either succeeds or fails, nothing you say will make a difference. You sound like you have a personal stake in this game failing.

    • csebal says:

      Do I want this game to fail? Nope.. Why would I? Every game developed by incompetent wannabes and failing reduces my chances of seeing the next great game getting funded, simply due to people losing confidence in the system.

      What I say does make a difference though, if ever so little, as if I just manage to open the eyes of 1 person reading my wall of text out of 100, then that’s 1 less going to fall victim of mass hysteria the next time someone comes with their great idea that they plan to bring salvation to the world with.

      I do not expect you or anyone else to agree with me though. As said in line one, mine is an opinion. Take or leave it. You not liking it does not make it any less valid, nor does it require me to “get a life”. Maybe, just maybe, it is you who should get a life, if you can get so upset about somebody having an opinion different from yours.

    • SQW says:

      Gee Gary, you must LOVE the pre-order bonuses, day 1 DLCs, early access, paid map packs, micro transactions and game crashing bugs on launch.

      Yup, that’s the reality of PC gaming now. Ever wonder how we got to this point? Because your average gamers are too lazy to protest and by the time the really really bad stuff comes around, the norm is already pretty anti-consumer. If you are a sucker, don’t blame the industry from trying to take advantage.

      If my ranting can convince one gamer to not fork out for a third M.O.R.E. KS then I’m happy I’ve made a difference. You can mind your own business like an ostrich but I DO have a personal stake in this – I don’t want my gaming eco system to be filled with more crap than it already has.

      • AstralWanderer says:

        @SQW: “Gee Gary, you must LOVE the pre-order bonuses, day 1 DLCs, early access, paid map packs, micro transactions and game crashing bugs on launch.”

        I’m pretty sure he doesn’t like them any more than I do – which is why Kickstarter games projects have attracted the attention they do. Some have certainly picked up the bad habits you note above, but many haven’t.

        @SQW: “Ever wonder how we got to this point? Because your average gamers are too lazy to protest and by the time the really really bad stuff comes around, the norm is already pretty anti-consumer. If you are a sucker, don’t blame the industry from trying to take advantage.”

        Again, the benefit of many (though not all) KS games projects is offering an alternative to the publisher-driven dumbed-down lowest-common-denominator fast-buck industry mentality that has let down discriminating consumers for so many years.

        @SQW: “If my ranting can convince one gamer to not fork out for a third M.O.R.E. KS then I’m happy I’ve made a difference.”

        Given they haven’t made so much as a whisper at a third KS, I’d say you’re tilting at one hellua virtual windmill. If IdeaLCenter were to try for one, I’d be happy to join the brickbat slinging party – but unless/until they do, your input is highly premature.

        KS isn’t a perfect system but it seems to have done a damn sight better at producing games we want than mainstream publishers have. If you don’t like the mainstream then you have little justification in complaining about KS until a better option comes along. Maybe you’d care to win a few lotteries and offer one?

        • SQW says:


          I never said people should back off KS. I said people should back off projects like M.O.R.E. on KS because the easier we give money to obvious half-baked projects like that, the harder it is for the legit ones to fund their projects or even get noticed. The video game crash of 80s shows letting the market be flooded by crap will hurt everyone, not just the gullible ones.

          Oh, and I didn’t mean IdealCenter will run a third KS literally – it was just an expression on backers choosing to believe anything. I suspect it is far more likely to do a DF-9 and put out a husk of a game and call it a day citing some the dog-ate-my-homework reasons.

          From their own forum, the latest plan is a playable alpha by Q1 2015 (in 4 days), one month to beta and another for polish. Seriously, given what we’ve seen of IdealCenter, if you believe they didn’t just write this latest plan on the back of a napkin then I got a Nigerian prince needing your help.

        • AstralWanderer says:

          @SQW: “I said people should back off projects like M.O.R.E. on KS because the easier we give money to obvious half-baked projects like that, the harder it is for the legit ones to fund their projects or even get noticed.”

          On what basis would you argue that M.O.R.E. was half-baked? A low funding target? Other projects (FTL, Malevolence, Xenonauts) have succeeded with the same or less. Poor design? That can’t be judged from a KS pitch. Overly ambitious promises? Other projects have achieved similar goals – though often due to having either having been worked on for months previously (as with M.O.R.E. which had 4 months work prior to its KS launch) or access to other sources of funding.

          The only real strike against M.O.R.E. is the lack of past videogame projects and again, we have many examples of successful Kickstarters without any track record. Plus limiting support to “industry insiders” has the effect of locking out newcomers and ultimately, stifling the sort of innovation that KS projects can deliver.

  39. csebal says:

    Terrible analogies.
    – FTL is a game with a VERY limited scope, simplistic presentation and is in no way comparable to MORE.

    – Malevolance is also pretty simple graphically and gameplay is not overcomplicated either.

    – Xenonauts comes close, but there we are talking about a game that
    a) is almost an 1:1 copy of the 90s XCOM game
    b) is still simpler than most space 4X games
    c) was also delayed several years compared to the original release plans

    I will not blame MORE for failing, should it do so. They are an enthusiastic bunch with lots of optimism paired with some unfounded self-confidence. Nothing wrong or surprising there.

    The problem is the system that has no control whatsoever and allows everything except for the most ridiculous ideas to be funded, regardless of viability. But why would it have any control, if the maintainer of the system is in no way financially responsible for the success of the projects.

    In fact, from the KS perspective, any sort of quality control based filtering would be a net loss, as it would mean less projects and as such, less profit.

    So you see, that’s the problem I am having. Today we are being drowned in a sea of junk. Every day I open steam, I see 3-5 new releases, all of which are cheap knockoffs of popular titles (half of them are usually minecraft-zombie-survival themed).

    If there is one half decent game released a month (out of the dozens of releases), then I am lucky, and even there chances are it will have issues.

    Kickstarter and Greenlight (+the half dozen others on the band wagon) are great initiatives on paper, but their current iteration does the gaming world more harm than good in my opinion.

    • AstralWanderer says:

      FTL is rather more complex than you seem to be giving it credit for – to my mind it’s an excellent example of Zen gaming with a minimalist appearance hiding underlying complexity (consider the number of ways to take out a hostile vessel – damaging systems, setting fire to ship internals, disabling systems, killing enemy crew, teleporting your own crew onboard to do any of the previous and the expansion adds further options like isolating rooms and controlling enemy crew).

      My point though is that it was successful with a very low funding target – 1/5 that of M.O.R.E. – so a low target can’t be assumed to be a substandard project. Ditto with the other examples.

      @SQW: “So you see, that’s the problem I am having. Today we are being drowned in a sea of junk. Every day I open steam, I see 3-5 new releases, all of which are cheap knockoffs of popular titles…”

      Essentially your complaint seems to be that we have too much choice compared to the “good old days” when we only had what publishers decided was going to sell. Well more choice (and variable quality) is a downside of lowering the bar – but given the increasingly narrow-minded and restricted content that publishers were offering, I’d argue that the benefits outweigh the costs.

      • csebal says:

        You obviously believe that 4X games are comparable in scope and complexity to games like FTL. Me, I do not share that belief.

        Let’s agree to disagree.

        About your Franklin speech about the freedom of choice:
        Yes.. giving the chance for independents to make games regardless of what publishers think of their ideas is great and I do not mind, as long as I am not flooded by them.

        So yes, in a nutshell, I would not mind having only 1/10 of the choice, if that would be guaranteed to be a decent game. I would still have more games to choose from than I could ever play, regardless of genre. The difference is, that I would miss a few dozen games each month, instead of missing a few dozen of shitty copy-paste wannabe titles each week, if not day.

Related Articles:

Post category: Kickstart, News & Announcements