Just like in court where the court doesn't declare you an unfaithful witness if you are caught in a lie. They just let it slip, and say "just because you lied on this item, doesn't mean that you may have lied on other things as well".
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Just like in court where the court doesn't declare you an unfaithful witness if you are caught in a lie. They just let it slip, and say "just because you lied on this item, doesn't mean that you may have lied on other things as well".
Great to see a more reasonable poster on that side of the "fence".
I too hope that you get the version of Elite that will make you happy and regain any confidence lost in FD.
Here's to a successful release and ongoing development on the project.
Repped
Is that really going to be it Michael? - F: D are not going to put out an official statement about this beyond what has already been said?
I would say that a honest article by David with a heartfelt apology (both for what they did and how they communicated it) would not remove the pain but would at least somewhat ease the pain.
I'm sorry there is no offline mode for those who want it, but at almost every single step of your dealing with this dev team and the development as a whole you have needed an internet connection to make it happen.
KS - Internet
Payments - Internet
launcher - Internet
download game - Internet
All modes in alpha and beta - Internet
Forums - Internet
And all through that you have not said a single thing. Why ?
But I do think the game needs an offline mode 100%.
KS - Internet
Payments - Internet
launcher - Internet
download game - Internet
All modes in alpha and beta - Internet
Forums - Internet
And all through that you have not said a single thing. Why ?
But I do think the game needs an offline mode 100%.
I don't have access to the beta and one of those complaining about the lack of offline.
Because it was always confirmed as a feature. Until Friday.
While I respect Drew (I have his book) that read rather like an apologists entry. Again, your views on this will depend on what side of the fence you are on, it will merely add to your own sense of being right.
The fact DB is tweeting about a friend of FD's safe blog, rather than approaching the community with a full and frank post from the horses mouth, covering the types of things we really need to hear with clarity and honesty, says a lot that about the missteps they have made, and are continuing to make regarding handling this 11th hour decision that affects a good number of people now, in the short term, and very possibly long term too.
It is worrying the size of the reaction, and the lack of urgency to engage directly from FD.
Makes me think of this
I'm firmly on the 'couldn't care less' side of the camp, but I sympathise with those who have legitimate concerns and haven't lost perspective.
The article's content is rendered irrelevant due to it's author. DB's tweet was poor form, he/frontier need to address this situation properly before it gets even more out of hand.
Has anyone said
"Maybe this isn't the game for you."
"You just don't get it."
"It's not that big a deal."
"E: D isn't (insert space game that does play offline)/stop trying to turn E: D into (insert space game that does play offline)."
or my personal favourite
"FD are making the game they want."
?
"Maybe this isn't the game for you."
"You just don't get it."
"It's not that big a deal."
"E: D isn't (insert space game that does play offline)/stop trying to turn E: D into (insert space game that does play offline)."
or my personal favourite
"FD are making the game they want."
?
Why would they? Everything that lead to the decision and about a future implementation was already stated.
Do tell. How many multiplayer games do you play with a ping of 1000ms or more?
For me personally, I find it fascinating, curious and contrary how people can be so biased and selective in who they "trust".
Amazing, really: Unless there is a new definition on what constitutes trust, these days...
It's not minor to everyone. Star Citizen is totally different and significantly better funded. Offline mode is no doubt possible but it means for FD a lot of resources to make it so.
FD has really dropped the PR ball here though, it's being reported on the net now and after the release date announcement people yet to buy the game will be reading it all. Five extra ships and smaller insurance costs won't cut it as a smokescreen. Stability needs to be 100%, it needs to be a smooth, flowing, flawlessly executed game and it just isn't which is very worrying.
While I respect Drew (I have his book) that read rather like an apologists entry. Again, your views on this will depend on what side of the fence you are on, it will merely add to your own sense of being right.
The fact DB is tweeting about a friend of FD's safe blog, rather than approaching the community with a full and frank post from the horses mouth, covering the types of things we really need to hear with clarity and honesty, says a lot that about the missteps they have made, and are continuing to make regarding handling this 11th hour decision that affects a good number of people now, in the short term, and very possibly long term too.
It is worrying the size of the reaction, and the lack of urgency to engage directly from FD.
Makes me think of this
That picture looks to me like a collection of forum doomsayers.
Because they could possibly go some way to appease some of those affected?, because it may be the right thing to do?, because 'burying their heads in the sand and waiting for the issue to go away' may not be the best outcome here? - I dunno, take your pick.
Lugalbandak
Banned
FD are making the game they want
So you "mostly" agree with what he said, but you would word it differently?
If so, please post your version, I'd be most interested in reading it.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status