I checked a rev iew of Retro/Grade and it seemed pretty kool. I am not as into buying schmups, nor rythm games, so nothing there for me to appreciate first hand, but the design, concept, and execution look really well done. It's hard to believe you made that and this game.
Here is likely an unpopular idea to toss out there.. Since Kickstarter is a fundraising method, what if they added a policy so that major backers had the right to pull funding if the project seemed to go south in a significant way (stall, fraud, mismanagement of resources, etc). Or for lower tier funders, a 'petition' could be signed, similar to a class action lawsuit, where if enough funders collectively chose to "pull out" the dev would be forced to forfeit a chunk of those petitioners funding at say 60% face value. So if 1000 people were up in arms with a game's direction/development and chose to pull their $10 investment, they'd get a refund of $6. It would make the "risk" a lot higher for the dev's, but it also could weed out a lot of the smallest folk throwing their hat in the ring without risking much of their own money on a successful campaign.
It would also mark some very interesting reports and situations where a studio banking millions could potentially lose large bits of funding if they try and pull a dick move and put out a lackluster game, a game nothing like they promised, or a game missing major features that were promised at release.
Like I said, I am sure dev's would HATE this change, but it'd add more risk and potential accountability to the mix. This would, of course, actually require KS intervention to some degree, so there'd be very specific policy changes to any divisions of KS that would be related. It wouldn't necessarily be locked to game design, as this could apply to all kinds of fundraisers.
Or alternately, KS locks in a set percentage of the total raised (15% as an example) and places it in an account, holding it for the initial 6 months to 1 year of the project, then reviews the petition file for backers to see if there is enough people up in arms to use it as a 'refund pool' and if no one is griping, it is released to the fundraisers. KS would be able to collect interest while holding the funds, which in itself could be substantial. That would generally require less oversight, and would at least give SOME backers a method to refund (again, likely at a loss) but the fundraisers would know of the potential and could accommodate. losing that 15% would suck, but not as much as the red mark on their rep for future work.