No Single Player offline Mode then?

[mbpoblet]

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.

That's not how procedural generation works.

At all.

Given the same seed, a pseudorandom number generator will always generate the same sequence of numbers, regardless of what machine it's running out (frankly, what's difficult is getting truly random data out of a computer).

Nothing is stored except the main seed.

Everything is generated on demand, kept in memory while needed, and discarded afterwards.

 

[jamotide]

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.

No, that was not my answer....try reading it again

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

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.

Indeed. This^

 

[srinidhalaya]

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

I believe what they say. It's that unless the question is asked, they won't give the answer, and sometimes even asking doesn't work. I think, what would be healthy at this point, is not for them to disclose WHAT is in on release date, but what ISN'T going to make it. And I would also like to know, if the funding model has changed, as an online only environment, is more expensive to support than one with an offline counterpart. They made it clear they are making the game they want to play, does that include subscriptions, one time purchase for items/currency, or other MMO style funding models. THINGS HAVE CHANGED.

 

[mnemon]

And therein lies the flaw in your argument

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

...

One could argue that playing with others in a LAN is not online play.

 

[Lobstris]

I've actually been playing pioneer quite a bit instead of beta 3. Which i find kind of sad in itself but I struggle to see the game in beta 3. I was holding out hope that there was a lot more to come in gamma/release. That hope has been badly shaken now.
All this talk of a rich evolving universe just doesn't match anything I've seen to date in ED. If its there then its functionally the same as a much simpler random generation system. It shows no depth, NPCs are just randomly flying around, you can't talk to them.. I mean... I don't know, there is nothing that couldn't be done easily offline (and done 100 times better) in beta 3. Maybe there is some incredible server side stuff that's just not been turned on yet. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I agree with most of your post.
.
Whilst I don't agree that an offline approach to background simulation would necessarily be an easy option, at present you can't look at E: D and say - "yes, that's an amazing, dynamic universe, multiplayer experience that could never be duplicated in single player!". Perhaps it will be like that in the future, but at present, it plays like a static single player game for the most part, one which has only comparable content to what Frontier or FFE had.
.
I just cannot buy the 'single player has to go so we can make the game we want to make', when all indications are that game plays like a single player game already! Especially when it already has a solo mode!. The dynamic events system, and dynamic markets haven't brought that much to the table yet have they? And nothing that couldn't be faked by an offline, event generating system.
.
@Frontier - I hope you put a lot of effort into making the dynamic events worthwhile to justify all of this.

 

[jamotide]

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?

No, they PROMISING an offline mode and now requiring a persistant connection (=DRM,read the wiki link) is why we have a problem.

 

[mnemon]

That's not how procedural generation works.

At all.

Given the same seed, a pseudorandom number generator will always generate the same sequence of numbers, regardless of what machine it's running out (frankly, what's difficult is getting truly random data out of a computer).

Nothing is stored except the main seed.

Everything is generated on demand, kept in memory while needed, and discarded afterwards.

That is not entirely true, you can generate a procedural set and use that pre-generated procedural set after the initial generation without actually going through all the necessary calculations to generate the set again.

 

[Xantasia]

Great point..ok let all those that are complaining about needing offline and having no internet access post up their stats and lets see how much time you have spent online in game.

Sorry but i think that ^^^^ is missing the point.

I did post way way back on page 41 and try and put across an honest and balanced view but having read all the posts maybe i am the only one to point out the obvious.

At the moment we are Testing ED, not playing a full release version of ED.

Those that backed the Idea of ED in whatever form have testing access. How they wish to play the released version is entirely down to them.
They may or may not have good internet access and they may have tested for many hours where and when they could, without all of us testing then the bugs would not have been found/reported/fixed etc.

So if they are happy to test and because ED has been advertised as having an Offline mode when released the actual need for an internet connection would appear to be not required to actually play ED at release.

So a huge own goal on the part of Frontier for the way this has been handled and now is the time they need to come up with a really big damage limitation plan.

What we are testing right now is great, has its flaws but still great yet i now worry about how they are going to handle the launch, when they cannot communicate with their core support over this particular issue.

If people want a refund on the price of the release version then yes they should get it, no need to ask questions why, the content is not going to be as advertised, but the extra for the testing access is non refundable if testing has taken place.

That being said Frontier could put a stop to all this with a "very carefully worded" statement if the PR department is fit for purpose.

Not having a moan/whinge for the sake of it, just trying to put a balanced view across.

No doubt there will have been another 40 pages of posts whilst i have been typing this

 

[Atinus]

The majority of people aren't interested in multiplayer

While I have no idea what most backers wanted or not, I know for a fact I was very interested in the multiplayer, and so far, I've really enjoyed it. It's a dream come true. I too made financial considerable investment to be able to play this game. Had to buy a modern gaming PC. Had to get my house hard wired for Internet ethernet when I realized the adjacent room's wifi was *not* working well with the game (RE: Default Gateway Unavailable error). I even ponied up for real-time wireless HDMI so I could sit on the couch in the family room with my kid to play. I pledged design forum because I wanted to make sure they got to the funding goal, and so I could participate in the discussion of what would go in.

But it is an indisputable fact from the initial Kickstarter that fully offline was not even an originally intended feature. It was added later in the Kickstarter process. And they say they spent time and resources exploring the option, but didn't work. Yet, the multiplayer does work.

Are you saying they should have dumped the online game, which works, in favor of continuing development on the offline version, which doesn't, when the original intent was to create an online game? In what world does that make sense?

 

[vjek]

... And nothing that couldn't be faked by an offline, event generating system. ...

Just so. Exactly like all other offline single player games in the genre have done since 1984.

 

[mbpoblet]

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?

Your argument breaks down once you introduce solo mode, though (as it did for SimCity and Diablo III).

Forcing a server connection on a single player game is DRM, no way around that.

 

[Diziet Sma]

This is what annoys me about all this anger on the forums - It's not as if we asked them to build a house and instead we got a car - we still got a house. It's just not quite the one we expected.

If this was Grand Designs, Kevin McCloud would be going back now and saying it's still wonderful, beautiful house - but it's not the same as the original plan two years ago, because along the way things changed. The foundations were not strong enough to take the original design so they have been worked around to find the best solution that fits.

No.. what they did was build a house.. then tell some of us we're not allowed to live in it.

 

[Kicks]

One could argue that playing with others in a LAN is not online play.

One could argue that indeed, but you'd still run in to the problem of the server-power required to deliver their idea of a dynamic universe.

 

[Zieman]

I just cannot buy the 'single player has to go so we can make the game we want to make',

Single player isn't going anywhere.
Offline is the feature that got axed.

 

[Angus]

Perhaps a bit of a wacky question, but would it be possible to have a "block all" command, so that people who didn't want to interact with other players could effectively play multiplayer on their own?

I don't even know if that would appeal to anybody, I'm basically okay with multiplayer in principle, myself.

edit, oh - looks like I misunderstood, singleplayer on-line is still an option then?

 

[T@F]

I believe what they say. It's that unless the question is asked, they won't give the answer, and sometimes even asking doesn't work. I think, what would be healthy at this point, is not for them to disclose WHAT is in on release date, but what ISN'T going to make it. And I would also like to know, if the funding model has changed, as an online only environment, is more expensive to support than one with an offline counterpart. They made it clear they are making the game they want to play, does that include subscriptions, one time purchase for items/currency, or other MMO style funding models. THINGS HAVE CHANGED.

They really need to start being honest now before it's too late for many of us.
subscriptions fees is a no no for prob a lot of ppl.
If that's going to happen we need to know asap so ppl can make there mind up to keep the game or get a refund asap.
As we never bought into a subscriptions fee that's for sure.

 

[Zieman]

Perhaps a bit of a wacky question, but would it be possible to have a "block all" command, so that people who didn't want to interact with other players could effectively play multiplayer on their own?

I don't even know if that would appeal to anybody, I'm basically okay with multiplayer in principle, myself.

That's called "Solo online" in E: D.

 

[mnemon]

One could argue that indeed, but you'd still run in to the problem of the server-power required to deliver their idea of a dynamic universe.

True, but as we don't actually know exactly how dynamic the universe is, we can't really make any claims that a suitably powerful PC couldn't handle it.

 

[mbpoblet]

That is not entirely true, you can generate a procedural set and use that pre-generated procedural set after the initial generation without actually going through all the necessary calculations to generate the set again.

Still don't need a server, though. Space Engine, for instance, is quite happy to generate the whole ' universe in a run of the mill PC, arguably with more detail than Elite: Dangerous does.