No Single Player offline Mode then?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Simple, you don't play the game in this case. When you install any game you agree to its EULA/T&C, if you do not agree with those terms your not supposed to install the game (you ofcourse entitled to a refund if this is the case). If the game requires a net connection and has in-game advertising you have two choices....accept the advertising or don't install the game, that is how EULA's work.

Which would be why you don't take crap of places like PC World when you go for a software refund and they say no because you opened the packet...the EULA requires you open the packet and insert the disk :) Simply tell them you did not agree with the EULA :)
 

gravityztr

Banned
i guess only those who would have a refund is those that have purchase the release game ONLY. for those that purchased the beta; you agreed to take part in the beta, and that has no real meaning to whether there is an offline game or not in the release. you're only a beta tester... thats all.
 
Simple, you don't play the game in this case. When you install any game you agree to its EULA/T&C, if you do not agree with those terms your not supposed to install the game (you ofcourse entitled to a refund if this is the case). If the game requires a net connection and has in-game advertising you have two choices....accept the advertising or don't install the game, that is how EULA's work.

problem is, their eula is just a piece of paper in this particular case, we need to understand legally what we/they should or could do, otherwise we would never get out of this mess...
i mean, we would never get out of thiss mess by FD's standards of communication
 
Still not a whisper from support about my refund. Wouldn't it be nice if they were as quick to give refunds, as they were at snatching the money from my credit card?
 
If you are referring to mis-information from anyone, including the mods in that particular thread from March, then I will have to say it was not mis-information.

Up until last Friday, he was providing accurate information.

i'm with you, if there was no offline coming, why they kept on quoting...and quoting..and generating sales..and generating sales...
of course mods are not responsible, it's just fd's attitude that proved yet again how malicious they were with this
 
Still not a whisper from support about my refund. Wouldn't it be nice if they were as quick to give refunds, as they were at snatching the money from my credit card?
Like dealing with a bank, innit? You owe them money, you're gonna pay. They owe you? Please form an orderly queue to the left and take a number, thanks! :D
 
Still not a whisper from support about my refund. Wouldn't it be nice if they were as quick to give refunds, as they were at snatching the money from my credit card?

I agree! My refund request went in about 2 hours after the newsletter came out..... I'm still waiting to hear a reply too.
 
If I were in your position, I wouldn't be too concerned about not receiving a reply to your refund requests at this stage. The important thing is that you've made your wishes clear to FD at an early stage, as long as you still have a copy of the email that you sent in your outbox.
 
Of course not, this game will probably NEVER be finished and I think most of the people here with 'common sense' know that already, its a constant work in progress and things will be added as time goes on. I expect them to be adding content for YEARS down the line. 6 months? Pshhh. We're not as stupid as you might think we are.

What extra content? More ships? Dev hosted events? Expansion packs that will have to be bought seperatly? Thats not extra content. This is a multiplayer game not an MMO. Like call of duty or battlefield is classified as a Multiplayer game. You have instanced P2P with a max of what 30 players per island at the same time. And the only online aspect of solo mode is events, market data and updates.

A finished game is access to the whole galaxy as promised. All 25 ships as promised. Any other items that should be there or not. You can't hold back expected content and call it updates.

The other stuff like walking around in ships and planets was clearly advertised as being introduced later. Whats listed above should be in there on release but it more then likely wont.
 
problem is, their eula is just a piece of paper in this particular case, we need to understand legally what we/they should or could do, otherwise we would never get out of this mess...
i mean, we would never get out of thiss mess by FD's standards of communication

Legally speaking its simple, If you wanted to be able to play totally offline you now know you cannot, so head on over to the store page and request a refund if that information is a deal breaker for you.

No laws or regulations have been broken, its only a mess because people feel as if they have been cheated when they have not been (let down, yes, cheated no) i do however agree that FD's communication of this entire thing should of been handled better.
 
Last edited:
i guess only those who would have a refund is those that have purchase the release game ONLY. for those that purchased the beta; you agreed to take part in the beta, and that has no real meaning to whether there is an offline game or not in the release. you're only a beta tester... thats all.

I'm inclined to think this may be true - certainly from a legal perspective.

However, I have asked for a refund of the beta - and if it is withheld I will dispute it as far as I can (e.g. not in any manner that would require significant time or any cost)

My reasoning is as follows:

- I would not have purchased the Beta access if I had no intention of buying the game (I bought the two together as bundle)
- I have lodged heaps of tickets that FD have [presumably] benefited from. I did so in good faith, and spent a lot of time battling with their and my network issues (not to mention bugs etc.) in the process, much of this time was not 'fun' = but highly frustrating
- As a result of the time I spent playing the beta, and seeing the potential for the game (as an offline game that I could play more many hours/months), I invested in expensive PC gear to enhance my enjoyment of it (weirdly enough, although I bought the CH HOTAS I left it on my shelf unopened as a present for myself to celebrate the launch of the offline game --- I might try and sell it on eBay now I guess)
- I did all of this on the understanding that I would be able to play offline. Offline was fundamental requirement for me, and I only made the decision to buy it once I had satisfied myself on the basis of FD's statements that it was a thing.

I realize this may not give me any legal rights vis a vis the money for the beta - but I think there is certainly a moral case and that FD should do the right thing here and refund it. There is nothing stopping them from doing so. They would certainly retain some of my respect if they did. I keep hearing from all the fan-boys on here what an amazing company they are - and how unlike the EAs and Activisions etc. --- but am so far yet to see any evidence of this.
 
Last edited:
If I were in your position, I wouldn't be too concerned about not receiving a reply to your refund requests at this stage. The important thing is that you've made your wishes clear to FD at an early stage, as long as you still have a copy of the email that you sent in your outbox.

I'd like to think that yes. But we really have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. What are FD's cash reserves like? How many people are asking for a refund? Are they going to hold off with refunds hoping that a sales spike near release will cover their costs of issuing refunds, or is it just time? It's all well and good to have consumer rights, but it's also interesting that they make this announcement a month before the game's release, and their refund policy states "within 30 days". I don't want to get all conspiratorial, as I really have no idea. But it seems like fair speculation given the available info.
 
Still not a whisper from support about my refund. Wouldn't it be nice if they were as quick to give refunds, as they were at snatching the money from my credit card?

I'm hoping that the deafening silence I'm getting since lodging mine around the same time means that maybe they are reconsidering . . . (unlikely I know! - but can't help hoping)
 
Actually promised content is very little. DDF is *guideline* for FD to design game. Not mandatory todo task for implementation. During Kickstarter in fact we were given very light sketches of what might happen. In reality game was fleshed out during DDF and later in development. Still, no DDF holds any legal promise from FD, they all come with disclaimer.

Said that, current game (sans passenger transporting and scavenging) covers almost 80% of DDF, so I really fail to see failure to deliver. Certainly nothing from DDF is legally binding.

The store page says differently and so does the Main Site. No where does it say that "Access to 400 billion stars after time" What is advertised on there site on there store and everywhere else should BE IN the launched product.
 
I'm inclined to think this may be true - certainly from a legal perspective.

However, I have asked for a refund of the beta - and if it is withheld I will dispute it as far as I can (e.g. not in any manner that would require significant time or any cost)

My reasoning is as follows:

- I would not have purchased the Beta access if I had no intention of buying the game (I bought the two together as bundle)
- I have lodged heaps of tickets that FD have [presumably] benefited from. I did so in good faith, and spent a lot of time battling with their and my network issues (not to mention bugs etc.) in the process, much of this time was not 'fun' = but highly frustrating
- As a result of the time I spent playing the beta, and seeing the potential for the game (as an offline game that I could play more many hours/months), I invested in expensive PC gear to enhance my enjoyment of it (weirdly enough, although I bought the CH HOTAS I left it on my shelf unopened as a present for myself to celebrate the launch of the offline game --- I might try and sell it one eBay now I guess)
- I did all of this on the understanding that I would be able to play offline. Offline was fundamental requirement for me, and I only made the decision to buy it once I had satisfied myself on the basis of FD's statements that it was a thing.

I realize this may not give me any legal rights vis a vis the money for the beta - but I think there is certainly a moral case and that FD should do the right thing here and refund it. There is nothing stopping them from doing so. They would certainly retain some of my respect if they did. I keep hearing from all the fan-boys on here what an amazing company they are - and how unlike the EAs and Activisions etc. --- but am so far yet to see any evidence of this.

Well said. I couldn't have put it better.
 
Absolutely not... if you buy a car and take the first ride only to find out you can't shift gear into any gear beyond second, you won't have a chance of a refund, right?
Standard purchases of physical goods can be reverted up to 6 month after purchase if they are damaged or miss an advertised feature. Usually you get a repair, a new one or if not possible a refund.

Face it, if hundreds or thousands of pre-purchasers will apply for a refund, it may have a considerable financial impact. And just because you deny it won't help...

In terms of whether it's possible to refund a "used" product (especially when your "use" involves attempting to use it and then finding out you can't, actually, because someone sooooo cleverly located the only server for the whole game in Ireland) - here's what Valve are currently being done for by the Australian ACCC -

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-relea...misleading-consumer-guarantee-representations

consumers were not entitled to a refund for any games sold by Valve via Steam in any circumstances;

Valve had excluded, restricted or modified statutory guarantees and/or warranties that goods would be of acceptable quality;

Valve was not under any obligation to repair, replace or provide a refund for a game where the consumer had not contacted and attempted to resolve the problem with the computer game developer; and

the statutory consumer guarantees did not apply to games sold by Valve.

All of those things are things the ACCC will take you to court for, if you sell your stuff to Australians.

Are the goods of acceptable quality? No? Well then. That's as much as you need.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom