No Single Player offline Mode then?

[Kicks]

THEN WHY DID THEY TRY TO HIDE IT?!?!?!?

Sorry for the caps lock, but this is the most important part in my mind. The whole DB's letter in the Newsletter was a joke, almost every sentence felt like a slap to my face. Seriously, do Frontier think that all backers are idiots?

Because, Commander, They didn't try and hide it. Michael has said himself in this thread that this decision was made over a week ago, and that they wanted to be sure that they had all their facts in place, and were absolutely sure, before putting it in the newsletter.

I agree, it could have been delivered better.

 

[srinidhalaya]

Hi. I understand your concern! But this was no way a factor involved in the offline decision.

Ed

It wasn't on the table during the decision, but has the funding model changed because of it. Offline mode was the guarantee for no subscriptions/pay to win.

 

[jamotide]

To say Online games have DRM because they are online is futile, and ill-informed.

Just read up on DRM before embarrasing yourself further, please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management#Persistent_online_authentication

Just read up on it, seriously. People in other forums are laughing about you, it reflects badly on the whole community.

 

[mbpoblet]

You are confusing DRM with the requirements that online-games have.

You're right, some companies abuse this. I'm looking at Ubisoft, here. And EA to some extent.

However I am not looking at Blizzard, because World of Warcraft requires an online connection to.. well... play an MMO. There's a world that exists beyond your PC and you don't get to have a say in what is happening in the world, unless you're online and slashing up villagers.

To say Online games have DRM because they are online is futile, and ill-informed.

Watch Dogs, on the other hand? Ignoring the "A player can interdict me" (my terminology ), there should be no reason that a player cannot play that game offline. It has a story, and everything required to fulfil that story are on the hard-drive of the computer.


Let's stop the DRM argument, you have no idea what it means... honestly

Always-on DRM or always-online DRM is a form of digital rights management (DRM) that requires a consumer to remain connected to a server, especially through an internet connection, to use a particular product.

Popular video games such as Diablo III and Starcraft 2 employ always-on DRM by requiring players to connect to the internet to play, even in single-player mode. Reviews of Diablo III criticized its use of always-on DRM. As with Diablo III, SimCity experienced bugs at its launch due to always-on DRM. Its use in SimCity was defended by Maxis, the game's developer, as necessary due to the level of computing involved in the game. Tim Willits at id Software has also defended the use of always-on DRM, arguing that it would make updates easier.

Reviewers have expressed issues such as early review experiences with products that have always-on requirement is in no way representative of the final product, since reviewers did not play under the same circumstances as normal consumers.

 

[Kicks]

No offline mode, is also a great way to force people into a pay to play, or micro transaction based funding model. If people could just play offline, then they lose potential revenue. OFFLINE mode was the guarantee that it wouldn't be.

Or the fact that they have a single, dynamic, rich universe to deal with rather than supporting 2 universes.. one with what I just said, and the other being a static, boring, representation of their vision which worked fine when we were wide-eyed with wonder 30 years ago, but wouldn't cut it as a single player experience today.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

this, end of discussion.

As I said it's not simply the data although that is certainly an issue. Remember you don't just have the start point of the galaxy, you have any changes that are applied to it. The decision making processes for gameplay within the galaxy are also cloud based and it's not a simple job to transfer these over. The vision for how the game works has necessitated a much more encompassing online structure than we'd initially thought. We've not just said - let's not do offline. We've investigated the different ways we can do it and the simple answer is that we can't - not without compromising the game we're trying to make.

Michael

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=58789&p=1002474&viewfull=1#post1002474

There are other posts from Michael saying there is no offline mode at all.

I'm not sure either where the "time to time" thing comes into it...but David's words were misleading - as they suggested there is an offline mode that needs to check in to the servers "from time to time". But that isn't the case. There is no offline mode.

 

[Kaltern]

Just read up on DRM before embarrasing yourself further, please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management#Persistent_online_authentication

Just read up on it, seriously. People in other forums are laughing about you, it reflects badly on the whole community.

Kicks is just trolling, it'll be best to ignore him from now on.

 

[jamotide]

Questioned. Not proven unnecessary. You can call it a duck, but if it's actually a freaking swan you just look a bit downsy.

I knew you were gonna use that to discard the whole thing. But whether it was necessary or not is irrelevant, it is DRM in either case. It not being necessary just makes it a bit deceptive.

 

[Kicks]

ED is far from MMO

Why is that? Honest question.

* Yes, there are player islands (limited to 32 currently I believe)
* In the universe, there exists a whole bunch of players (multiple)
* Given the announcement that offline is not feasible, and that is due to player-interactions in the universe... we can shape said universe.


What is non-MMO about that?

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

Hi. I understand your concern! But this was no way a factor involved in the offline decision.

Ed

I can easily believe that - I have never thought the FDEV wanted to go that route. But please Edward, you may be able to mitigate some of the backlash here by enumerating some more of the factors that were involved in the offline decision, and perhaps provide a reason as to why that decision was only disclosed yesterday.

Please, we are your customers.

 

[Lawyer237]

I have to keep saying this: If an EU citizen wants a refund the store terms are no longer valid due to lack of a durable stating technical constraints at contract time, the position is there is no longer a contract in place. This is for STORE purchases only.

Kickstarter refund is untested here, it would have to be shown it was a purchase of digital content and that's not currently how it's stated, it's considered an funding investment. It could be proven as a purchase however, as it has been in Washington USA, who knows. I am not interested in this. I think the game is a lame duck but I backed for personal reasons that still stand.

Store buyers who do approach FD for refunds please PM me with your experiences. I have offered to fund a UK test case out of my own pocket if it ever goes that far and I am collecting information. I am getting 'digital law' advice and we can share this with you if needed.

Whilst I agree that the conduct of representing something (i.e. the offline feature) that induced (in part of whole) the contract but which is not part of the licensed software provided pursuant to the contract may give rise to a claim in misrepresentation (in English/Welsh law at least), if anyone seriously believes that suing on that basis or any other is sensible then....well...take some competent advice.

Yes, before someone asks, I am a lawyer (a barrister) and, yes, I do know the law. I am equally frustrated/annoyed/let down as anyone else but if I do not think it sensible/proportionate to take any form of action then, really, think before you act.

 

[the darkwalker]

Hi. I understand your concern! But this was no way a factor involved in the offline decision.

Ed

quite difficult to believe your words right now...what if from one month from now you will change your minds again?

 

[PrometheusDarko]

Are you being deliberately obnoxious? I'm referring to the LOG IN requirement, which is the only means of DRM that is needed for it to be referred to as such - the rest of the crap you spouted out is typical of today's gullible - do you honestly believe that every aspect of the game is stored on magic servers that produce all the star system data? it is PROCEDURAL - meaning created from equations, which the original Frontier game did was back, probably before a lot of those defending this move were born.

The only data that is held by servers, are market, trading and player position - I don't think we need supercomputers to work out where a planet should be in the galaxy. Or are you one of those who believed that SimCity NEEDED online connections to calculate the innumerable equations required to workout the math behind the game?

Maybe because, as is the case with procedural generation, the servers need to store this data to ensure that when I jump into a system, my computer doesn't decide it's a 6 planet system with a pristine metallic belt, and your decides it's a 3 planet system with no belts. Either way, it's pointless because to you, for some unknown reason, you see any online connectivity as DRM.

I knew you were gonna use that to discard the whole thing. But whether it was necessary or not is irrelevant, it is DRM in either case. It not being necessary just makes it a bit deceptive.

Really? That's your answer? "It just is, okay?" Okay. Sure. And I say that the sky is green. I know what you are going to say to discard it, but it just is, okay? And to say it isn't is just a bit deceptive.

 

[tomba4]

Because, Commander, They didn't try and hide it. Michael has said himself in this thread that this decision was made over a week ago, and that they wanted to be sure that they had all their facts in place, and were absolutely sure, before putting it in the newsletter.

I agree, it could have been delivered better.

But they DID (see my other reply; I read the newsletter, but the cut of ofline play was so well hidden I didn't even notice it).

Seriously, why the secrecy? Why not make it clear, apologise to the few backers that relied on offline play and move on? Online-only is perfectly fine for most people, so just be clear about it instead of lying to backers' faces.

 

[TomFoolious]

The only game you mentioned that wasn't a MMO was CS. ED isn't a MMO, I certainly don't regard it as one.
Only a handful of online only games are successful. The rest either barely make do or fall and burn.

The point wasn't MMO, the point was online only, glad that went over your head!

 

[PrometheusDarko]

quite difficult to believe your words right now...what if from one month from now you will change your minds again?

Nothing you can do about it is there, so I guess you'll just have to either play a different game, or trust that the Devs know what they're doing. Honestly, the boogyman isn't coming it get you, it's not a conspiracy, you can take off your tin foil hat.

 

[Kaltern]

Maybe because, as is the case with procedural generation, the servers need to store this data to ensure that when I jump into a system, my computer doesn't decide it's a 6 planet system with a pristine metallic belt, and your decides it's a 3 planet system with no belts. Either way, it's pointless because to you, for some unknown reason, you see any online connectivity as DRM.

I'm not going to bother arguing as you are also obviously a troll - seriously, if you have valid arguments, then make them, but don't pretend you invented DRM and then tell everyone else they are wrong, please. It doesn't impress anyone.

 

[Amorelia]

Like I said it sucks that it means some have been cut out of this - but you know what? Horrid internet connectivity aside, I think many of the antagonists here will be quite happy playing the game given this decision.

For me, this will depend entirely on how FD choose to fund the ongoing costs of the servers. Right now, I do not see any good options.

 

[Kicks]

Always online=DRM
and if its an MMO it is still DRM, just innate, so easier to sell as necessary.

And therein lies the flaw in your argument

To play with others, must one inherently be online to do so, surely?

Now, if you released a game that is solely *offline* (or can be, e.g. Watch Dogs minus their online components), but that required you to be online to play a single-player game, then yes, you can shout DRM.

I never, ever, played with any one else in the "Driver" franchise. But I had to be online to play it. That's DRM.

Elite Dangerous, whether you believed it or not before today, is now a title that is about other people and an online experience. That's NOT DRM.

If they had released the offline component, but then insisted you were online, that would be DRM, wouldn't it?

 

[Loren Lovanchi]

When I joined Eve in 2004 it was not dark and unforgiving, I played for a few years in the same Corp doing level 4 missions mining all sort of Coop stuff and enjoying the friendships. Dark and unforgiving, at least not until PVP became top dog some 5 or 6 years later. I played many online games trying to Capture the flag type stuff to mostly be stabbed in the back or by some player just shooting everyone on sight. Eve was simply a game of brilliant coop missions slowly being taken over by PVPs and grievers. When Elite came out I was in my mid thirties and have played games ever since. I have enjoyed so many offline games I cant remember half of them. I joined ED thinking this was Elite with Coop which I have always championed. The rise of the PVP worried me as it did in Eve. I could not go offline in Eve so leaving after 8 years was unfortunately a good feeling. Watching ED on the slippery slope is not fun, without Offline I am stuck with the rise of the PVP side of the game, which I believe is a Michael thing. Is the cry to close down Solo and Private modes only a question of time too. I think I will go play Far Cry 3 for a while and decide on Far Cry 4 but at least I am not biting my finger nails in anticipation of Thursday or the 22nd or even the 16th Now. I will play Solo until that too is taken away.

You really must have had a hard time in EVE hehehe (after reading quite a few of your posts )... but you could open your scope a bit more: ED is very different in design, it's very easy to opt out of multiplayer and play solo, and you can also add people to an ignore list if you feel annoyed by some... and it's not even all about PVP in open mode btw, many players also want to cooperate, and many others, including me, are also having friendly and good PVP fights where our ships are shot to pieces by other human CMDRs *... it's not all about getting "ganked" in a mining ship like you seem to have suffered in EVE for a long time... you are free to play as you want, but you might be missing out on some good fun, just because of your previous bad experiences in another space sim...

* Yesterday I had a bit of PVP again: scanned, interdicted out of SC and killed a couple of wanted CMDRs. The third one I pulled out of SC, I scanned him with the KWS, and he was not wanted, so I opened comms and asked him if he fancied a bit of Cobra vs Cobra pewpew, despite the fact that he was not wanted, and he replied: "Sure, why not? Let's have some fun!"