Offline solo is something I would never use but but im genuinely gutted for you chaps it means so much to, I know how much Elite means to many people and how long we have waited for this. I'm no game designer but surely they could let the game auth initially and then dl a static and set commodities list and structure based on the tech levels of a system. Would a dynamic universe be that vital to offline mode?
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Nope, apparently online is "their vision™". And offline, even though all previous games were, isn't.
Number of backers for and against each of the options is irrelevant.
When they say they're making "the game we want to play" "we" refers to Frontier, not to Frontier and the backers.
Well a lot of us are worried, about things like:
- what else will FDEV lie to us about in the future?
- will the servers hold up on December 16th, because if they crash we can't play at all
- how long will the servers be up and online? Do we have a year or two to play? Five years? Ten?
The offline mode answered all of those concerns nicely, which is why it was a very highly desired feature. Trust is broken, and people are worried. And I fear the bad press is really going to hurt Elite in the very sensitive window of a few weeks before release, not a good time to get bad press. I truly hope the online only launch goes super smooth, because if it doesn't then this will be very bad...
That's a bit harsh considering it's the weekend.
See what gets said in the week...I doubt they'd let it try blow over without making a statement.
Nice guy and all, MrB. But I view that comment as disingenuous, at best.
Which is kinda wrong as we're the ones ultimately playing it. If they said make then sure but the word play was used instead.
![Igor[Rock]](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/18/18560.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
THIS. I am [insert your favorite strong word for displeasedness] if (I am using the conditional, because I still hope they understand what a bad idea this decision was and will revert that decision - with a BIG apology!) they really don't deliver a real off-line single player mode.
I won't ask for a refund, because I like the game online, too - but you can be absolutely sure that if they don't deliver an off-line mode later on, this will be the last game I ever buy from them. I am in my mid-40s, I have a good job and money to spend - the ideal customer for "luxury" things like games, but I don't cope well with broken promises. And I for sure won't buy any add-ons (or a subscription - after all, if they break their promise for an off-line mode, they might break their promise of "subscription free", too!) later on, too.
In fact, I'll make sure that everybody I know will get to know how unhappy I am and what I think of Frontier as a company. As they say in business school: "A happy customer is just ONE happy customer, but he won't tell many people that he is happy. An unhappy customer is 50 customers you don't get, because he will tell everybody how unhappy he is.".
God, I thought game companies should have learned by now that there are things you should try to avoid - like stabbing half of your own customers (or, like in this case, your own BACKERS, which is even worse) in the back.
For now, I'll just wait and see what happens tomorrow - maybe somebody with more brain than e.g. Barbara Streisand (a totally random example, I promise!) understands in what kind of disaster Frontier just maneuvered itself and pulls the brake first thing in the morning. Lets hope so. Otherwise they will have a lot of bad press and backslash on this issue.
P.S. This again makes you think that Ian Bell was probably right all along when it comes to David Braben's conduct... (http://www.iancgbell.clara.net/elite/faq.htm#A13)
I wonder how much of that is the same people linking the same reddit pics and the same threads with the same promises in them, for the benefit of people who seem to repeatedly forget that any of that ever happened. Is it my fault people insist on being so wrong? I will contend that it isn't and do my best to aid their battles with early onset Alzheimers wherever I see it.
Up to 4th!
Offline speak seems all a bit too disingenuous to me
From the developers of X Series to a lone men developing Evochron Mercenary and soon Limit Theory, all before have been able to create a compelling offline experience with perfectly functional economies and events. Now with 240 developers, they wish to make people believe in a way seemingly until now was exclusive to the likes of EA and Activision that there's so much computational weight in the cloud (their words) that a few devs can't be pulled aside to work on this which they've presumably worked upon until very recent is beyond me when others have done so with ease. I could be more than sympathetic to a straight forward statement of apology but to bury this which was promised to all backers only a month before release in a pure bait and switch fashion is atrocious.
From the developers of X Series to a lone men developing Evochron Mercenary and soon Limit Theory, all before have been able to create a compelling offline experience with perfectly functional economies and events. Now with 240 developers, they wish to make people believe in a way seemingly until now was exclusive to the likes of EA and Activision that there's so much computational weight in the cloud (their words) that a few devs can't be pulled aside to work on this which they've presumably worked upon until very recent is beyond me when others have done so with ease. I could be more than sympathetic to a straight forward statement of apology but to bury this which was promised to all backers only a month before release in a pure bait and switch fashion is atrocious.
what? when i bought the game on the store "after SEEING NEWS ON BBC" 1 month ago there was offline NO DRM mode, now they removed a feature, now we are debating it.
how's that wrong?
Make the game you want and you will probably find an audience... So they are making the game they want. If you had jumped in on the KS you could have had a bigger voice by pledging at the level that gave you access to the Design Discussion. As it stands right now, this is possibly the biggest discussion on here and yet it's a very small percentage of the backers that are unhappy. Even fewer are the doomsayers. Just loud, but not that numerous.
I cant believe they would take away a choice from the very people that funded this because "it would be detrimental the their vision" give the people who wanted an offline only mode and let them decide if it sucks if they feel it does perhaps they would then try to figure a way to play solo online?
I believe you just did a thing they call friendly fire
care to explain?
And something that would not have been apparent until it went into "open" testing and attracted the interest of those who excel at this and profit from it.
- Status