Every feature in SpringFall, graded and published

There is now a progress tracker at springfall.games/roadmap.html. 23 systems, 114 features, and one number at the top: 64%.

That number is not a marketing estimate. It comes from a grading table that has existed privately for months — a row per feature, each carrying a stage from planned to shipped, graded by hand against the code. The page publishes it as it stands, and the percentages are untouched.

The wording changed; the numbers did not

The private ladder reads Planned / Building / Built / Verified / Playtested / Shipped, and two of those rungs mislead anyone who is not holding the codebase. “Built” carries the internal description never run in Unity — ship that word to a player and it reads as finished. “Verified” sounds like a guarantee and means the opposite of hand-played.

So the page says Code complete and Working in-game instead. Same rungs, same percentages, wording that means what it says. A feature sitting at 50% is written and compiling and has never been run; that is worth knowing, and it is not worth dressing up.

The part that nearly went wrong

Each row has a notes field, and it is deliberately blunt — the kind of entry it exists for is works, but never played at 50 colonists. That candour is most of the table’s value and precisely what must not appear on a public page. So the publisher runs off an allow-list: name the fields that may cross, and anything not named fails closed.

Except the allow-list was decorative. It was filtering a freshly-built object that already contained only the safe fields, rather than the row itself — so adding a field to the list changed nothing whatsoever. It read exactly like a boundary and enforced nothing, and the test asserting it worked passed just as happily.

It surfaced by deliberately breaking it: putting the internal notes field on the publishable list to watch the guards fire. They didn’t. With that fixed, the same experiment fails three tests and the publisher refuses to run at all, naming around 100 real internal notes it would otherwise have shipped to the internet.

Voting

Signed-in readers can vote features up or down and leave comments. Votes are read as priority, not approval — a downvote means “lower down the list”, not “this is bad”. Sign-in is Steam or GitHub, no email address is requested or stored, and there is a privacy page setting out exactly what is.

One thing the tracker cannot do is promise. Every percentage is a stage: a row at 90% can still be pulled if it does not hold up in play, and a row at 0% may never be built. The page says so above the number, which felt like the honest place for it.

What would you push to the top?