No Single Player offline Mode then?

[Cosmos]

So I thought you guys might like to read a blog Drew Wagar wrote about this issue. I think its worth a read, its well written and considered. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water hey.

http://www.drewwagar.com/progress-report/elite-dangerous-and-playing-offline/

 

[CARLOS3]

Have you read the Eurogamer piece?

No wonder Rab Florence stopped writing for them

I think slowly that you are a worker of FD, sorry

 

[astrologos]

This 5000 + posts thread will become very famous in the gaming industry so be gentelmen and smile.

 

[Wyzak]

To be quite clear, the only reason I'm not going to request a refund is because I also got Star Citizen for my offline needs.

This change does mean that I'm not going to back any further kickstart from Frontier, or even pre-order their products anymore, though. It's not merely about a game mode I was looking towards not being available; it's about going back on a promise and failing to properly communicate the change until the launch date was almost upon us. Changes to the KS promises, or even the possibility that they might not be fulfilled, should have been communicated as soon as possible, not kept hidden until the game had almost launched.

The same thing happened with Planetary Annihilation from Uberent. They promised an offline-capable game, and didn't deliver on it. They then launched another kickstarter which failed epically, and then suddenly added a half-baked offline mode to PA. Some times the devs need to learn from their mistakes the hard way.

 

[Titus Balls]

I think slowly that you are a worker of FD, sorry

I applied for a job there once, even made a Elite 2 themed CV. Didn't even get an interview sadly.

 

[Ydiss]

Yes there is, but this wasn't necessary on the game that we backed. Now we need to go and spend our time that we would have been spending in game to try and debug an issue that was created by FD.

Little unsure why you would want to allow your children to be a part of a dangerous world where you can have slaves, transport drugs and kill others players/npc's especially unsupervised. but that's another topic altogether...

Indeed. Though I'm not sure why minor protection is a valid concern here; solo mode does this just fine.

Unless he's taking about accessing anything else on the net. Not really FD's responsibility that. Nor was it a design intention of the game.

 

[Windsaw]

the problem is this isn't just a grieving process. this is a business and we are customers. part of ending the grieving, for many, will be a firm commitment to never supporting an FD kickstarter or FD game again.

If it would only be that...
As it is, this whole affair (what FD did) is severely damaging other crowdfunded projects as well. I read about comments in other forums and it you see many comments like "how could you be so dumb to pay money for a product that doesn't exist yet". And they have been given a lot of fuel.

Personally, I was always careful what game developers I choose to trust and support. FD had my trust, now they don't anymore. Lessen learned: Don't trust any game developers.
Anyway, it's not that bad. I guess there are some developers left who I would give money. But they have become less. Other game developers will suffer because of how FD handled the situation.

 

[Ikari]

Here's the dirty fork sketch for a little perspective.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdzqTGmEcZE


Have fun.

 

[zaccheus44]

I'd camp that group with #1 here - that's pretty much the same as no internet access.

Except for "No competition" - for that you still have solo online mode.

Incorrect solo online still has competition. Ie I find an awesome silver rich asteroid belt. Log off for work and caring for my child come back in a few days and source is now depleted. Maybe just a hypothetical. Maybe FD will have better algorithms so wells don't dry up so easy. Bur I've seen the equivelant happen several times to me with trade routes. The other players influence on the game word is making my experience less rich than if an offline e mode existed.

 

[Wyzak]

Strange though that all these people complaining have been happily playing this game since their pledge date dont you think, so their internet connections have been working well enough up until now.

Patently false. Not everybody on this forum has access to the alpha or beta. I haven't been able to play the game yet and have been patiently waiting for the 16th of Dec to enjoy the game. One of the reasons I backed is because offline-mode was promised. I want to be able to play the good games with my son 20 or 30 years from now.

 

[CARLOS3]

I applied for a job there once, even made a Elite 2 themed CV. Didn't even get an interview sadly.

Really? count your posts on this topic

 

[Ackoman]

I doubt it. English Billion is standardised with the American meaning now, a thousand million. For financial reasons I guess.

That is pretty much what I was expecting to be honest - although (if Titus Balls' numbers were correct), that means ED has fewer systems than First Encounters, not more.

 

[SuBSynk]

So I thought you guys might like to read a blog Drew Wagar wrote about this issue. I think its worth a read, its well written and considered. Lets not throw the baby out with the bath water hey.

http://www.drewwagar.com/progress-report/elite-dangerous-and-playing-offline/

Finally a balanced article on the subject, good to see/read.

 

[Rampant]

The thing to do is hit save. Everything comes at some cost. The MMO Elite is something we could barely have dreamed about a decade ago, but it does need a little more commitment than a solo game. It's true with any hobby though. If you are building a model aeroplane, or painting miniatures you need a few moments to disengsge from the activity safely. I don't see why needing to save the game is somehow worse and more onerous.

The fundamental point still remains the breach of trust:
1. Product offered for backing/pre-order that included offline mode.
2. Offline mode subsequently confirmed on more than one medium.
3. Customers pay money for said product.
4. Offline feature switched off before development complete.
-
Why is it difficult for some people to see this as a breach of trust and as such a very negative outcome for *everyone*? And I really do mean *everyone*, even those who don't actually give two hoots about the dropped feature. Are people's morals generally completely lacking these days? We, *WE* - the entire customer base - *ought* to be united on this. Every single one of us. Instead of being derisory amongst each other and dividing into opposition.
-
In short - what FD has done is NOT RIGHT. It needs to be acknowledged by all and voiced as not being right and proper.
-
Would anyone care to disagree with that sentiment?

 

[jamotide]

Finally a balanced article on the subject, good to see/read.

Balanced and wrong. It has everything to do with DRM. Not being able to play it without an online connection to the FD servers is by definition DRM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Always-on_DRM

 

[Binerexis]

The fundamental point still remains the breach of trust:
1. Product offered for backing/pre-order that included offline mode.
2. Offline mode subsequently confirmed on more than one medium.
3. Customers pay money for said product.
4. Offline feature switched off before development complete.
-
Why is it difficult for some people to see this as a breach of trust and as such a very negative outcome for *everyone*? And I really do mean *everyone*, even those who don't actually give two hoots about the dropped feature. Are people's morals generally completely lacking these days? We, *WE* - the entire customer base - *ought* to be united on this. Every single one of us. Instead of being derisory amongst each other and dividing into opposition.
-
In short - what FD has done is NOT RIGHT. It needs to be acknowledged by all and voiced as not being right and proper.
-
Would anyone care to disagree with that sentiment?

Read this thread.

It even has details for a refund request.

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

Balanced and wrong. It has everything to do with DRM. Not being able to play it without an online connection to the FD servers is by definition DRM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Always-on_DRM

Except it isn't an issue of DRM, it's the fact that the game simply won't function if it's not online. Read this thread.

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

There is one solution where FD could go back on offline mod later, think.

Sell it later as an expansion (or even as separate game) after they have spare money for it (and possible technical issues can be overcome). But give it for backers free if possible financially (=enough will pre-order offline expansion/game).

 

[Voivod]

Balanced and wrong. It has everything to do with DRM. Not being able to play it without an online connection to the FD servers is by definition DRM.

So every online game has DRM?
Would you also consider breathing a DRM in order to continue playing the game of life?

 

[nick_j_bacon]

I hope for the best, but FD have broken the trust all the backers, and all us customers placed in them. Broken promises, broken networking, broken lots of things. Most of all our trust.
.

Everybody is entitled to an opinion but please don't assume you speak on my behalf. You most definitely don't. On this or any other topic.

 

[Stormprooter]

Genuine question, where was this promised? Do you have a link?

It was personally promised (confirmed) to me here by Michael Brookes:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=10856&page=4&p=254938&viewfull=1#post254938