No Single Player offline Mode then?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
****The ghost of mods past returns****
triniti.gif


Ok, here is my tuppence.

This is correct. The Mods were informing the forum to the best of their knowledge they had available. Certainly, to me at least, this announcement was a surprise to me also. Speaking personally, I would encourage FD to look again at this off line option for the simple fact that those in far flung areas with patchy connections could be excluded from playing the game entirely. There will be folk out there who don't even know about this yet because they lack a connection to the internet. I really feel for those people because they don't have a voice here. Also being able to pause the game when dealing with real life intrusions in your "Elite playtime" is also a useful feature for those of us with familys, pets, naughty 20+ year old computers....;)

Lets not forget that the overriding feature that all the Elite games had was freedom to play the game as you saw fit. That choice is what set Elite apart from just about everything else that was available at that time. It was the very first sandbox universe you could play around in. This offline mode is a feature that (in my view) is too good to drop. Its part of the Elite legacy, people love to experiment, try different things. I know I do.

Now don't get me wrong here, an evolving universe that responds to player actions and can have injected events to stir things up is a very cool thing indeed. I am glad all over it's there and I will be playing online and loving it, but that choice people, that choice....

Now I have supported FD from the very beginning of the kickstarter (and even a bit before that too) and still do, they have achieved wondrous progress in bringing back Elite for a new generation to experience and for us, *cough* :eek: , "more seasoned" players of the older games too, but please FD, reconsider this move. Many have said a cutdown and initially frozen simulation of the galaxy is acceptable. I would agree with this, heck, I also agree that sticking something like a spruced up FFE or FE2 galaxy model into an offline version (even with all its inaccuracies) would be the right thing to do. It won't be as responsive, it may even be regarded as boring and too repetitive for some but at least it gives those without a decent net connection the chance to experience this great game (even in a reduced form) wherever they happen to be. This in itself keeps Elite as an all encompassing global phenomenon as it should be no matter if your in hi-tech Tokyo or away up someplace in the Scottish highlands. :eek: And also that ability to pause the game to deal with that annoying real life thing is beyond desirable in my view.

At the end of the day it's (as it's always been) FD's call, but they are good people, generous and thoughtful too who have consistently shown they do listen. If you doubt this just check out the DDF archives. It is my hope FD will also reconsider this move even if it must come at a later date. The fans have done a wonderful job in keeping the faith, now (respectively) its time for FD to show that same faith in the fans. :)

****Back to the æther****
curtsey_zps7e1ec1d8.gif

Geraldine, this is the most brilliant well-written and thought-out post I have ever read on this forum. Thank you so much for writing it and sharing your thoughts. For what it's worth, I couldn't agree more. I feel the same; you cleared the neutron blasters for firing and hit the pursuit ship squarely in the cockpit (hit the nail on the head) precisely. Take care and hopefully our words shall be read and considered by those who can put it right.

PS: Speaking of having the option of playing Elite Dangerous offline in the future... well, you're absolutely right. That certain... "elephant in the room" why its useful. Not necessarily for us happily online now but for our children and children's children who might not be. There they are one evening, sitting in their underground nuclear fallout shelter a few years from now. Suddenly while watching old episodes of Blake's 7 on an old infotablet one of them has the urge to play an old classic PC games series we used to talk to them about when they were very young called Elite. They even read a few books and novels about the final game in the series, Elite Dangerous, at bedtime. Oops, sorry.. Can't do that! They made it online-only!

If not for our children, then what about the Elite children in hardened bunkers under the Whitehouse, or the military complex beneath Denver airport? Or the underground cave complex owned by the Royal Family in Scotland? Can't they play some cool old PC games in the future too? Unless of course, Lord Braben is planning to live there with them in the guest chamber with his "Elite" personal offline code that the "unwashed masses" remnant of survivors and scientists with no more Internet will never see? If not in an underground fallout shelter, then let's say on a space station orbiting Saturn or Proxima Centauri. Anywhere, without Internet access to the game servers in future is our point. That's it. Gaming history consigned to the ether of memory, only to be experienced in a few remaining Isinona YouTube videos saved on a tablet stick for posterity. If only we could experience it again first hand. Sorry, can't do that, kid. Thanks for listening.
 
I'm not denying that some people will have pledged because of the offline, simply pointing out that the pledge rate doesn't support the hypothesis that without offline ED kick-starter would have failed. The pledge rate before the 3 week announcement was the same as after, which is not what you would expect to see if the number of "offline" pledgers was significant.

Hmm lets work out the math very basically..

6,649 posts .... 25,000 odd backers on the kickstarter....there cant be more than 1000 people posting they want a refund and many have posted multiple times...
If they all got a refund of around £50 average then refunds would cost FD around 50 grand....All guesswork !!

Not great .....But far far from a show stopper....Or I could be totally off ...
 
Last edited:
So I was one of the beta backers that was swayed by the offline mode. I travel a lot and most nights I can't get an internet connection, or when I do it's no good for gaming. This news is disappointing for me for sure. If I were looking to purchase in Dec then I would likely not buy the released game. I avoided Diablo 3 for the same reasons, and I was really looking forward to that too. But ho-hum.
.
Given I will be playing ED when I'm at home (no I don't want a refund thanks) I'm now more interested in how the dynamic world will impact someone like me who doesn't get that much time in the game world. For instance I was interested at being an explorer, but I'm guessing as we have a single world that I'll not be able to explore too much, compared to the peeps who start on day 1. I appreciate there are quite a few systems out there, but it would take a bucket load of time to get to the verge of unknown space, unless I've missed something.
.
Likewise with some of the events/trades that are going on, surely if I quit on a Sun night part way through a trade route, then come the following weekend that route could be depressed in what would be seconds on my in-game time.
.
I'm worried that for part timers, or those late to the party (1yr+) this will be a fair disadvantage to them. Actually disadvantage is the wrong word here. Others will always progress faster, it's nature, but it will certainly limit what is possible.
.
I hadn't given it much thought before as I was more likely to be in an offline world, but I'd really like to see some clarity around how the online mechanics will work for late comers and those with little time. I'll have to do a bit of forum trawling at the weekend to see if it's explained anywhere.
.
Edit: Wow, why has the formatting gone mad. Apologies for the extra full stops, only way I could see to fix the formatting.
 
Last edited:
I understand. But you have to believe them that it really would take too much resources.
They were always honest with the community.
At least wait for what DB will say about this matter - and i am sure he will address this issue.

DB unfortunately has already offered mis-information in the newsletter, by stating that you will only need to connect "from time to time" in solo mode. That was quickly debunked by Michael where he confirmed that no, you need a constant connection to play.

Meanwhile, today his "response" on Twitter was to link to a soporific & apologetic article by Drew Wagar, one of the official fiction writers. No bias* assumed there then!

* To be fair, Drew is a stand up bloke and I take him at his word that he is only offering his own opinion and it's nothing to do with Frontier.
 
I guarantee you your English is better than whatever your native language is! :) The point is that non-native English speaker (even good ones) often struggle to see the subtle "tomes" of native English speakers. I say this as someone whose mother speaks English as a second language and even though her English is superb (nearly 40 years in the UK) she still sometimes struggles with getting the "tone" of a conversation.

His answers were so short and simple that I could not missinterpred anything.

If I may give an example: you in charge of creating an online children's interactive learning site and somebody asks you to produce an offline version. It's not just a case of dumping the site to a local hard disc, because lots of the content is pulled from servers to download the latest info (celebrity faces for you to throw coconuts at, background music based on the top 10, weather backgrounds based on the weather where you are etc). So the content for the offline site has to be reworked so that all the pictures, music, stories etc. come from a local source, which then has to be created and packaged. Things like the weather background need to be removed and replaced with local backgrounds based on the internal clock. Then, as you cannot patch problems on the fly, you need to test every one of the pages and games to make sure there are no major bugs. You are no longer developing one web site but two.
.

So, they know how to do all that on server(s) but not on local PC? Sorry for not buying that!

Or this is just evidence that they regarded multiplayer as the core game? True the manner of announcement was clumsy but sometimes people make mistakes, people make jokes they think are funny in their head and someone ends up insulted. Did that person mean to insult them or was it a clumsy mistake?
.

So they should told us that only MMO pay to win microtransaction allways connected wanna be EVE was their idea of new Elite.
It was a clumsy mistake I have pledged in then non existant product basing my judgement on promises and nostalgia over old elite games, although all of my friends considered me stupid and telling me that they (FDs) will mess something up. I've got a good friends! and that will teach me not to preorder or support anything anymore.

MB has said that they couldn't get the galaxy to "live" and they felt that was unacceptable. Ultimately, it's their game, they are the creators, they get to decide if they are happy with the product.
.

that was diplomatic answer. That did not answer to anything. MB should explain more detailed what he ment by that. This is just not adequate answer. yes, it is their game and our money. At least i can expect decent answer and surely something more than "we were not happy about it, it was unacceptable, but hey, we are so excited by cool multiplayer". I'm not happy with such an attitude. they have been forcing multiplayer all the time. I was silent because I hoped to play crippled and not exciting offline game I've been promised for, so i just did not care. Now I do care!

But MB has stated they did want to do offline and tried to keep it but had to conclude they couldn't. If they decided a week or two ago (or even last month) it might still take some time to arrange an announcement.
There is an ongoing debate about the difference between DRM and something just requiring online to work. Does twitter have DRM? What about Facebook or Gmail apps? The apps can be open source with no DRM at all but they are useless without online.

well, they have shown same amount of enthusiasm for offline single player as they would have shown for plague carrier, didn't they? So maybe we were crazy to expect anything more than that what happened on friday. If they ever worked on offline mode it was obviously annoyance to them and sort of unwanted child they were happy to get rid of.

and explanations for need to be online for getting commodity prices in single player are also laughable (considering again FFE).

Sorry for being rude a bit but I'm heavily dissappointed by all of this! If i have believed some developer it was FD. That is why dissappointment is so big!
 
Thunderbird installs on your system, has no authentication check, and is system agnostic. It's an email client. If you do not need an email client why would you install it? If you need an email client then it's a DRM free email client, and if you have your own server, then guess what? You have the option to set zero authentication (Granted that would be a REAL security risk) but if you wanted to, you COULD. That's still a terrible example.

Tweetdeck requires a twitter account which is free, again, no DRM on the software client and you can install it locally (but again, if you don't use twitter, why would you).

Those are DRM free software, they're used for accessing internet based API's, but it's important to note that the applications themselves are in and of themselves entirely functional without the internet, you could still access your offline mail with Thunderbird if you were disconnected from the internet. And if there was offline twitter storage, you could do the same with tweet deck. Therein lies the fundamental difference, no internet connection means no Elite Dangerous *At all*, tutorials excepted, which are not the game.
 
Just because a group was not a significant portion of the backer base (and KS was only part of the backer base) doesn't mean they should get refunds for throwing a strop.

It would not be for "throwing a strop", it would be for making a fundamental change to what we were told we were getting. I find this "it's kickstarter, you have no rights, they can do what they please" attitude pretty obnoxious. This is a software house, a business, not a charity. Promises made should be held accountable not brushed off with an "oh well, it's just the way kickstarter is you know".
 
Edit:
But it's wrong to say "we were promised an entirely different game to what we're actually getting". The offline-mode was thought to be merely a small feature which turned out to make more problems then initially thought. Please stay objective with your comments. You are seriously damaging FD and ED.

This is false, unless you mean it was considered a small feature on Frontier's part as far as expected workload was concerned. For the public it was considered a huge feature, as is evident by the significant funding jump when it was announced, as you can see at the end of the graph here: http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous/
 

psyron

Banned
If they were honest about it, why did it take til 1 month before release to be upfront about it.

Why couldn't this have been discovered earlier? Again see my question on who was working on offline mode and why didn't they say anything to the community a long time ago that he couldn't do his job.

What do you want to hear? That they have been a bit too naive about the complexity of it? That they maybe intended to do it nevertheless as a expansion - but decided that it would take too much resources? That maybe they are realizing that CIG/SC is becoming a big competitor with a lot of money and a very agressive PR campaign?

In order to get all the beauty of planetary landing and so on as future expansions ED MUST SUCCEED!!!
Sorry but if the offline-mode was a sacrifice in order to meet that goal i fully support it!
 
Last edited:
But it's wrong to say "we were promised an entirely different game to what we're actually getting". The offline-mode was thought to be merely a small feature which turned out to make more problems then initially thought. Please stay objective with your comments. You are seriously damaging FD and ED.

No it wasn't thought to be a "small feature" to many backers at all. For some, it was a deal breaker if it didn't exist. For me, less so - but I would have simply pre-ordered the game and possibly beta access without offline mode being on the table. A game for the ages is what prompted me to pledge big.

As for "seriously damaging FD and ED" - get serious. 1) Nobody gives a monkeys what I say or write on the subject and 2) Even if they did, FD have brought this situation entirely upon themselves. It was not I who elected to break trust. And it was a choice that FD made... don't be naive by thinking otherwise. It's 100% their code and 100% their decision / fault if they can't fulfill the promises made to backers.
 
If Frontier had said in the kickstarter that it was purely an online game only, then it is my belief that it would have not hit the target. The ks would have failed
 
Currently about 813 all told, including everyone. (Obviously that's all posts, not just those asking for a refund).

How do you (or I) track/view that?

[edit] Ah, you revised it as I typed. The bracketed bit clarifies. I know how to track that. :)
 
Last edited:
What do you want to hear? That they have been a bit too naive about the complexity of it? That they maybe intended to do it nevertheless as a expansion - but decided that it would take too much resources? That maybe they are realizing that CIG/SC is becoming a big competitor with a lot of money and a very agressive PR campaign?

In order to get all the beauty of planetary landing and so on as future expansions ED MUST SUCCEED!!!
Sorry but if the offline-mode was a sacrifice in order to meet that goal i fully support it!

So you are saying its ok to take someone's money and not give them what they want as long as it gives you what you want? What if by chance you donated money to the kickstarter for planetary landings and in a year from now FDev says "Sorry guys. No planetary landings. Too complicated." How would you feel?
 
I hope it's a loaded poll. *click* Yup. Missing the obvious 3rd option.

Yeah, it was intended to have just a YES and a NO Answer.
I think polls with more options tend to be watered and have no meaning.
If you have 3 options you might still think: "I wish there was a fourth"
Because Options never fit opinions at 100%.

If you have a complex story of how and why you decide to buy, feel free to write it in that thread. :)
I have to vote NO as well, though i wish they had sticked to their promises. But it simply was no decision point for me.
And this is all i want to see.
 

psyron

Banned
No it wasn't thought to be a "small feature" to many backers at all. For some, it was a deal breaker if it didn't exist. For me, less so - but I would have simply pre-ordered the game and possibly beta access without offline mode being on the table. A game for the ages is what prompted me to pledge big.

As for "seriously damaging FD and ED" - get serious. 1) Nobody gives a monkeys what I say or write on the subject and 2) Even if they did, FD have brought this situation entirely upon themselves. It was not I who elected to break trust. And it was a choice that FD made... don't be naive by thinking otherwise. It's 100% their code and 100% their decision / fault if they can't fulfill the promises made to backers.

"It was not I who elected to break trust"

Again, you are damaging FD/ED by implying that they were not honest. We don't even have all the facts right now and you are already throwing reproaches around you.
We should all go to bed and sleep over it. At least that's what i will do ...
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom