Yeah it has been a while since I considered /. essential. Looking around the first few pages - hell - most stories about Elite on PCGamer, gamespot etc got 2-3x as many comments as anything that has run on there lately.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Yeah it has been a while since I considered /. essential. Looking around the first few pages - hell - most stories about Elite on PCGamer, gamespot etc got 2-3x as many comments as anything that has run on there lately.
Harbinger
Volunteer Moderator
At no time was it in any of the beta versions, hence it was not removed from the program. It was always an intended future feature.
Last edited:
When Ubisoft goes and releases monstrosities like an unfinished Assassins Creed : Unity that's so buggy and unfinished that there's holes in character models and glitches that create things that would give small children night terrors (they look like something out of Five nights at Freddy's *brr*), or EA make a complete trainwreck out of a respected franchise like Simcity, what on earth do you actually expect people to do? Take the results with a smile? These kinds of actions need to be called out, and rightly so, and there needs to be honest dialog between both consumer and seller. Trust is a fragile thing, and when you break it, stuff like this happens.
"Quote Originally Posted by Michael Brookes
We have no plans to shut the servers down anytime soon. This is a core project for the company and we intend developing for it as long as we can.
Michael"
So, the simple fact is that you don't have a plan...
It would also be interesting to know, but I realize this is most likely a company secret, what kind of server capacity you have and if it is spread around the world or if you have a single point of failure? I fear a major server breakdown around the 16th of December and/or very instable network code in the initial release. I mean your track record regarding the net code isn't the best and now when we don’t even have offline I would guess this mean no game for *anyone* for quite some time after the release date.
I hope you have canceled all Christmas vacations because if you fail with the online component during launch a real perfect storm will come your way, that’s for sure.
We have no plans to shut the servers down anytime soon. This is a core project for the company and we intend developing for it as long as we can.
Michael"
So, the simple fact is that you don't have a plan...
It would also be interesting to know, but I realize this is most likely a company secret, what kind of server capacity you have and if it is spread around the world or if you have a single point of failure? I fear a major server breakdown around the 16th of December and/or very instable network code in the initial release. I mean your track record regarding the net code isn't the best and now when we don’t even have offline I would guess this mean no game for *anyone* for quite some time after the release date.
I hope you have canceled all Christmas vacations because if you fail with the online component during launch a real perfect storm will come your way, that’s for sure.
Last edited:
So what FD have managed to do in this development process is push away large chucks of both parties when it comes to online/offline play.
Push away the "offline" crowd by making in online always.
Push away some "online" players by trying to cater to the offline crowd with some half baked online capabilities.
It looks like FD have to the be the first studio ever to make a game neither offline or online.
Push away the "offline" crowd by making in online always.
Push away some "online" players by trying to cater to the offline crowd with some half baked online capabilities.
It looks like FD have to the be the first studio ever to make a game neither offline or online.
They're not monstrosities! They're CINEMATIC™!
Even if someone felt that Offline was a complete waste of time and should never have been included in the first place, I don't see how people can defend the way FD chose to let people know this feature was canned. These customers helped get this game made and should have been treated with more respect.
It's the way FD did it that really gets my goat.
It's the way FD did it that really gets my goat.
No - but at the time FD were planning to do offline. Changes happen. Especially when you are getting close to a forced release date and you realise you can't deliver all the features you wanted.
Which bit don't you understand?
Last edited:
Ha ha, coincidental that I was trying to reply to this as server hits high load!
Anyway, wanted to say that as displeased as I am with Frontier's handling of this, anyone taking such action beyond "free speech" is an idiot. It doesn't help, it's childish, petulant and potentially damaging... just don't!
Well you seem to have made your intentions fairly clear with the burn/slashdot comments.
On the subject of Kickstarter and things FD said - presumably the bit about "assumptions that were made at the start may prove to be mistaken" is invalid in your eyes?
Isn't that how Internet forums work??
I do occasionally hold the idiot optimism that Elite Dangerous's forums might rise up from the murky depths and provide forum users blessed with clue. Right up until this disaster, the ED forums were a shining beacon of competence in a mire of stupidity. The moment offline mode gets pulled it seems like everyone suddenly forgets to engage their brain (or at least move the gearstick out of neutral) before hammering the keyboard with fingers, oranges, hotdogs or whatever else is nearby.
The worst part is that FDEV are simply making it worse by not actually getting ahead of this trainwreck and managing the message, they just seem to sit very quietly and let the inferno unfold.
I don't see a lot of people disagreeing. How they did it needs a serious look at internally.
Why they did it - well I think everyone can see that right?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
There are 2 ways to handle it.
One do a big apology, maybe offer some more freebies, explain in more detail about why they can't go back, offer some refunds.
Or just sit tight and eventually it will go away.
I've worked for a corporation that did the second and it did eventually go away. But employee morale became an issue and the brand was damaged.
We'll see what happens but with the Première event happening this week what a great time to do a proper apology eh?
I honestly think that is how Frontier deal with marketing issues. I don't think it is a great approach - but it is a typically English way of dealing with things.
There's still a lot of great posters here on these forums, but mostly buried by all the current uproar. I'd like to say it will die down, but my past experience with forums shows that it will only continue to get worse now. This tends to be a general pattern that all (most) forums follow.
What he said. +1
And, though I don't buy the conspiracy theories, I think Frontier Dev do owe their backers and buyers some more explanation. I know they're a decent bunch, and FWIW I think they've (a) had to make a really tough call (b) explained themselves incredibly badly. Now, they've got past form at explaining themselves badly, but newletter #49 really takes the biscuit - sly, weasely wording, and a fundamentally dishonest attempt to make an abandoned promise look like good news. It's actually a classic case study in "inauthentic communication fosters distrust and cynicism".
It sounds like Frontier Dev have now retreated into their shell, and are just hoping that it will all blow over. I think that's a mistake too; they have a community here that does basically buy into their vision, and wants to have faith in their good intentions. But by clamming up, they're losing control of the story, and they're losing the trust of their supporters. You build trust by communicating frankly and openly, and dealing fairly with people who depend on you - and at this point in the game, we need to hear Frontier Dev saying "We know that offline mode matters very much to some of you, and we're sorry that we can't deliver it like we said we would; we don't want anyone to feel they've lost out because of this, so we'll offer refunds to those affected." Their people (like I said, decent folks, doing their best) have already written this kind of stuff in the forum, so a general communication (newsletter, press release ...) wouldn't leave them legally committed to anything more than they've already committed to.
And I don't know who it is that has to sign off on newsletter content, but Frontier Dev should really think about that. If it was a big investor who insisted on the 'positive spin' I reckon that David should have strong words with that person about how quickly you destroy shareholder value when you damage a good reputation. And if they over-ruled their Communication person's objections to this wording [and they must have: no Comms professional would have done anything so daft!] maybe they should reflect a bit more carefully next time before ignoring the advice from the experts.
Last edited:
It seems pointless to post in this thread where individual posts are a droplet drowned in an ocean of despair but I do have a few things I wanted to get off my chest.
First for me as a KS backer and I'm sure I am not alone, the whole idea of the single player was longevity to me. When you back on kickstarter you are accepting a large amount of risk in your investment, that's fine.. you weigh it up and you decide how much you can risk for the potential reward. That's exactly what I did, enticed by the prospects of years of online play but the security of knowing if the game flopped, or even if it didn't, in 30 years time just like the original Elite '84 I'd be able to fire up my Boxed DRM Free version of ED and play the offline single player.
By removing SP offline, the risk monumentally increased - longevity is gone, we're not not just reliant on the game being finished but it being a success and a success for years if we want to continue playing. But additionally the DRM Free boxed version simply can no longer exist (since persistent online authentication is in itself a form of DRM (even if that's not the intended mechanic)). This is very disappointing and Frontier will have to do more than flaunt a few extra ships at me to alleviate this one as I do sincerely want to know exactly what "rewards" they plan to deliver instead now. Right now, with the way this was handled I simply cannot believe anything they can do will amount to giving the same level of confidence in their project as single player offline did, and as KS backers, what having a DRM free boxed copy would have meant for us down the line.
I will contact them like the others with concerns but since it's going to presumably be a while before we hear from them I thought I'd share my thoughts publicly to. I respect it was a tough decision but considering the major phases of the design process were months ago I can't help but think they've been sitting on this. Speculation aside, confidence in FD is truly rocked, and I've withdrawn my recommendations to various friends in the mean time.
First for me as a KS backer and I'm sure I am not alone, the whole idea of the single player was longevity to me. When you back on kickstarter you are accepting a large amount of risk in your investment, that's fine.. you weigh it up and you decide how much you can risk for the potential reward. That's exactly what I did, enticed by the prospects of years of online play but the security of knowing if the game flopped, or even if it didn't, in 30 years time just like the original Elite '84 I'd be able to fire up my Boxed DRM Free version of ED and play the offline single player.
By removing SP offline, the risk monumentally increased - longevity is gone, we're not not just reliant on the game being finished but it being a success and a success for years if we want to continue playing. But additionally the DRM Free boxed version simply can no longer exist (since persistent online authentication is in itself a form of DRM (even if that's not the intended mechanic)). This is very disappointing and Frontier will have to do more than flaunt a few extra ships at me to alleviate this one as I do sincerely want to know exactly what "rewards" they plan to deliver instead now. Right now, with the way this was handled I simply cannot believe anything they can do will amount to giving the same level of confidence in their project as single player offline did, and as KS backers, what having a DRM free boxed copy would have meant for us down the line.
I will contact them like the others with concerns but since it's going to presumably be a while before we hear from them I thought I'd share my thoughts publicly to. I respect it was a tough decision but considering the major phases of the design process were months ago I can't help but think they've been sitting on this. Speculation aside, confidence in FD is truly rocked, and I've withdrawn my recommendations to various friends in the mean time.
Last edited:
- Status