No Single Player offline Mode then?

[deMangler]

Story is starting to hit online gaming sites.

Here's a piece from Eurogamer.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-11-17-elite-dangerous-ditches-planned-offline-mode

and another story by incgamers

http://www.incgamers.com/2014/11/el...ffline-mode-single-player-to-be-always-online

Especially like this comment from there:

"@PlugMonkey well let's see, shall we? They've already back-peddled so who is to say that next week they won't change their minds again and insist on a constant connection?

I live in China, so depending on the whims of the government Elite may be declared against the common good and the servers completely outlawed.

In the evenings my connection speed goes down to BITS per second. So yes - if I wanted to play that night, and my Internet wasn't doing so well, I wouldn't be able to. It happens already a lot - it killed Diablo 3 for a long time, and is currently rendering Destiny unplayable and anything that uses the Ubisoft client frequently falls over removing access to my single player games. [redacted] that noise.

I admit I'm probably not a common case, but it's a big world. Lots of different scenarios. And until today, everyone thought that Frontier would support that.

Shame they won't."

Makes me feel lucky. I just wanted to be able to play while travelling.

 

[cherbert]

crazy isn't it? I think people should quit moping around a forum complaining about a feature cut from a game that will affect their lives in a very minor way and maybe spend more time looking after their kids....!

One guy on here is restricted to a hospital bed. Are you going to make fun of his dilemma too?

Some people are on deployment fighting for your country.

 

[Aldric]

The playing area is pretty huge. I doubt it will hard to find an area where you pretty much aren't affected by players at all.

A good point, but for those that want to play in a (sealed off universe) they will still be affected by people playing in Online mode affecting the markets etc.

 

[Titus Balls]

I could not care less about offline.

The fact is that everything in the KS was subject to change, the offline mob don't seem to understand this.

The way FD handled breaking the news could have been done a LOT better mind you.

The angry mob have done the real damage though, I'm waiting to see if they have done enough to kill this game for us all,time will tell.

100% agree. People say that "white knights" have come on here and attacking people who wanted offline for various reasons.

Actually I was very sympathetic, and I still am - to a point. Where I draw the line is where people make personal attacks, threats, etc because they are not getting an offline game.

And agreed, I think the offline crowd - many are cutting off their nose to spite their face and now no one will get nice things.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

FD should just make a statement that IF the servers are shut down, they will release the server code so we can continue playing the game as long as we want "offline"

No, they shouldn't. Even if they do, how are you going to hold them to it?

 

[Pulse]

I think people should quite moping around a forum complaining about people moping around a forum complaining about a feature cut from a game that will affect their lives in a very minor way and maybe spend more time looking after their kids....!

I think i'll go and play the game I backed because it works and plays as advertised, even in beta.

i'll leave you all to argue the toss over something that matters not in the grand scope of things, peace out!

 

[Nomadski]

For some of us internet connectivity isn't the problem at all...



... but this is. Online Solo is not the same as playing on your own. You see noone else around you but they're still affecting your gameplay in massive ways (markets, exploration and mining for example).

All of this change is change that has exactly the same impact to you offline, had it been automated by AI, than it has online, because CMDR Profitss sold a lot of stuff ten minutes ago.

The effect is the same, the cause is pretty irrelevant.

If you are out there in 400 billion systems, just what watered down effect is anyone going to have on anyone elses game, beyond a few core systems?

None of the explanations make any sense to me.

 

[noodle]

Actually I was very sympathetic, and I still am - to a point. Where I draw the line is where people make personal attacks, threats, etc because they are not getting an offline game.

Small minority though. Most of us are making balanced, reasonable posts.

And agreed, I think the offline crowd - many are cutting off their nose to spite their face and now no one will get nice things.

I'm not. I haven't even decided whether to seek a refund, and if I do, it won't be for the whole amount. I figure I'd have pledged even if it was on-line only, but I wouldn't have pledged so high.

 

[RedTide]

40+

Another 40+ gamer here that grew up playing Elite on the Commodore 64 and loved that feeling of isolation and the just me against the universe vibe. Perhaps David Braben doesn’t understand why his and Ian Bell’s original concept was so compelling to gamers back then?

I don’t buy the technical argument, this has been proven with other games that online only is not a technical requirement but rather a financial one or a controlling one or a lazy one.

I just want my little universe to be my little universe and I don’t want to have to fly within 100 light-years of ‘Idoyourmom247’ on my way to trade some wheat with another system.

I also live in a country with less than great Internet, so don’t want to be a slave to the whims of undersea cables and hackers attacking game servers. Diablo III is painful enough.

Offline was a big selling point and because I foolishly thought David Braben was from the same era as me, I pre-ordered. To be honest I would probably have still bought it regardless because I loved the original – the risk of nostalgia. This again just makes me wonder where and how this great gaming industry we grew up with turned out so rubbish so quickly.

 

[ecgallagher]

{REDACTED}

 

[tagos]

Frontier ( Elite 2 ) Had an entire procedurally generated galaxy, NPCs, planets, stations, pirates, police, an economy etc and it fitted on a single 1.44Mb Floppy disc.
How can offline play be so hard in 2014 ?

It can't. It's a non-technical decision. Trade prices, faction reps and random missions could all be done client-side. Plenty of other games do procedural generation client-side. For whatever reason they've chosen not to. These may be good reasons or not but they'd have to be really good reasons to justify backing away from a major feature they repeatedly confirmed would be in at this late stage.

 

[Jackruss]

I think people should quite moping around a forum complaining about people moping around a forum complaining about a feature cut from a game that will affect their lives in a very minor way and maybe spend more time looking after their kids....!

I doubt that will happen as the " I'm alright Jacks" are still posting. Gone is the sense of Community, gone is the trust. Just please ED answer this thread with some positive News.

 

[tagos]

There seems to be vibe from some of those affected that they want answers from FD but no matter what FD says or does they are not going to believe them.
Seems like here may be nothing FD can do at this point to fix things with some people.

The rest of us can't be held responsible for your 'vibes'.

 

[Andrew_C]

It's not hard.
From what I have read they planned on somehow using the online galaxy to facilitate offline play. This became problematic due to the nature of the online galaxy.
Therefore they would need to completely separate them resulting in two products, two code lines that would need to be supported. Resources to do this are not available.
It does not preclude porting the server version offline in the event the servers are taken down. This would allow you to run it locally.

WHEN the servers get taken town they probably won't have the resources or money to spend however long converting it to an offline game. If we are lucky we might get a code and data dump and some brave programmers will sort it out into something workable for free.

But that is unlikely because that code and data belongs to Frontier Developments and it's investors, or in this situation, whoever has just bought them out, and will have value to them.

I can stilll play Elite in an emulator, I can still play Frontier in DosBox. I doubt the Elite: Dangerous servers will still be up in 10 years.

 

[noodle]

There seems to be vibe from some of those affected that they want answers from FD but no matter what FD says or does they are not going to believe them.
Seems like here may be nothing FD can do at this point to fix things with some people.

To a point, they've dug their own grave on that though. The situation has been badly mishandled, and they've blown a lot of trust. Nevertheless, I don't think it's impossible to fix things for a lot of people. A clear refunds policy for purchasers and backers would be a start, followed by an clear commitment to seriously investigate if they can have a plan in place to keep us playing if FD goes boobies up.

 

[deMangler]

Just did a google search on news for Elite Dangerous:

Linkage


Wow, just wow...

I hope and pray that FD change their minds about this. Otherwise they will have to close their minds and that would not do them good as a creative company at all. I have seen that rot set in before.

 

[Wolframium]

Seems like there are 3 camps:

1. No or poor internet access - have to play offline
2. DRM
3. Availability of game in the future.

Solutions:
1. Nothing can probably be done for them at this point.
2. Might as well debate religion or politics
3. FD guarantees an offline conversion when the servers shut down so you can still play years into the future.

Sounds like if #3 happens many would be satisfied. Is this true?

Sorry, but that does not cover everything.

I may be the odd one out here, but while points 1, 2 and 3 are certainly important to me, for me the main issue with "forced online" mode is another thing entirely, which I will repeat from my previous post: I expect a game to stay the way it is the moment they bought it and not change over time because a group of players the existence of whom you will never ever be aware of (unless you spend about as much time arguing on the forums as you do playing) complained that "drop rate is too low/high!", "farming is too easy/hard!", "my class is too disadvantaged!", "weapon X is too overpowered!", while I liked everything just the way it was. I enjoy gaming because it offers me the possibility to detach from the real world and all its troubles for a few hours and, therefore, I strongly resent the real world intruding into my gaming experience.

David Braben talks about "stories unfolding according to the actions of commanders" and says that "Galaxy, story, missions, have to match [...] A fully offline experience would be unacceptably limited and static". See, I strongly resent that. I don't want *my* game to be influenced by what other players do, not even a little bit. The only commander whose actions I wish to see shape the course of events in *my* game is ME. I want the game to respond to my actions, not those of some other guy who lives on the other side of the planet. I want my experience to be unique and personal. I want a single player game, as I was promised.

 

[jamotide]

There's a difference. EA only claimed that there was so much going on when in reality that was a lie. With frontier, you can easily prove that what they're saying is true - pull your network cable and then purchase any goods.

Funny, but there is one real difference:

At least EA did not sell their preorders as offline and DRM free.

 

[Globusdiablo]

.......[video=youtube_share;LA-ZvZJ9fvw]http://youtu.be/LA-ZvZJ9fvw[/video]

Thanks Tim. I agree completely.

 

[Jackruss]

Exceptionally well written and well balanced post.
Thank you.
-
I, too, thought Sir David Braben was "better than this".
-
It appears, however, that many people will jump to the defence of the an organisation that has fundamentally and categorically breached the trust of its customers.
-
Maybe trust and honesty are now outdated concepts for the "online generation".
-
Personally, I struggle to understand how breaking a fundamental promise is in any way acceptable. It appears, however, that my view on what is acceptable is not shared by quite a few posting on threads like these and this thread in particular.
-
Cheerz


-
Mark H

Trust once broken is almost impossible to repair.

 

[stimutacs]

To a point, they've dug their own grave on that though. The situation has been badly mishandled, and they've blown a lot of trust. Nevertheless, I don't think it's impossible to fix things for a lot of people. A clear refunds policy for purchasers and backers would be a start, followed by an clear commitment to seriously investigate if they can have a plan in place to keep us playing if FD goes boobies up.

Personally I would be fine with a full reversal, just like all those other full reversals recently from those other, much larger corporations over similar issues. The ones where they insisted the game/service was totally set in stone and impossible to reverse right up until they did.