Well done. Perhaps you should campaign for an offline forum, as you seem to have trouble interacting with people in an online one without being needlessly offensive.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
I think they revealed it once it was finally clear to them that they can't put out an acceptable quality offline product, and without compromising the main game as well.
As for the "physical drm free" reference, remember thise games that required a disc in the drive. That is what it refers to. The disc in the box was clearly described as a curio, and exactly the same as downloading the game from the site. It is purely something retro to have on a shelf. I sure would have liked to afford it, but money was quite tight.
You mean I should trust them now when they said "maybe" while they betrayed my trust saying "we will" earlier?
Last edited:
Yes it was.
The fact that has it has been confirmed & reposted since then, on the forums and on different sites / interviews that offline was a thing only makes matters worse. But it was there in the Kickstarter & Frontier took a lot of money from people on the back of that - without which, there would be no game at all. The vast majority it seems are not getting refunds.
I was one of them. You live and learn.
Last edited:
A plot item in Zombieland.
Utter rubbish. A very VERY few are effected. If you have enough bandwidth to post to this forum you have enough bandwidth to play solo.
jup that is the measure of this. plus some empathy for the hard done by...
ps: oi zieman that metal trololo is awesome thx ^^
Last edited:
I spend most of my forum time over at the Eve Online forums but everyone from there is coming over here now because it's apparently where all the action is.
I hope so. I've been In since premium beta and have found markets flatten fast and recently that mining resources are gone as quickly. Its very hard to make money (right now the only positive metric of progress in ED) as a casual player. They keep talking about dynamic missions and story but so far they are just random rinse and repeat missions. Lets hope Braben got that part write at least and didn't find that it was too hard or whatever other excuse he wants to use
No more explanation needed.
You guess is correct...( at least in my case). I increased my backing only after offline and DRM-free was offered for the old-school experience.
Well, I've just read newsletter 50, and it just seems like a hastily rushed out exercise in damage limitation to prevent any awkward moments at the premiere event. Sadly, though, it doesn't say anything new. Braben hinted that there might be an offline mode at some point in the future, but that's all it was a hint, not even a vague promise
-
And I don't think refusing so many people their refunds is doing any good for the game either. It's just stoking their anger even further. I have this ominous feeling that this is not going to end well
-
And I don't think refusing so many people their refunds is doing any good for the game either. It's just stoking their anger even further. I have this ominous feeling that this is not going to end well
Just got the new newsletter. No way to misunderstand the section regarding offline play. They've now set it in stone that they will not be adding fully offline mode. As such I have now put in my request for them to cancel my order and refund the full amount I paid for the game. I did not pay extra for the alpha or beta access, so it should be straight forward as per this section:
Will you give people refunds?
We have started responding to requests where there is a clear outcome:
- Those who have pre-ordered an Elite: Dangerous release version from our online store and have therefore not yet played the game are eligible for a refund.
- Those who have already been playing the game online in the Alpha and/or Beta phases, regardless of whether they backed the project via Kickstarter or purchased access to Alpha and/or Beta through our online store, are not eligible for a refund.
As for those who had alpha and beta access. I'm pretty sure you guys can still get refunds (or at the very least partial refunds) if you want them. Frontier Developments is a UK business. And as per both US and UK consumer law, what they've done here can and does fall under "False Advertising" and "Bait and Switch". Both of which are illegal in both countries. Meaning anybody who bought the game on the premise that the game would include a full offline mode (and committed Frontier Developments to that promise/commitment at the point of sale) are entitled to a full refund, regardless of whether you are an alpha and/or beta purchaser. Although, technically, I think in the US they could get away with partial refunds by refunding the cost of the final game, but not the cost of the Alpha nor Beta access charges, because those could technically be considered as sold services rather than actual products. In the UK, I think it's more strict than that when considering many of the new UK Distance Selling laws that have recently taken affect. In the UK, I believe you would still be entitled to a full refund regardless of the Alpha and Beta access. But I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know for sure and don't quote me on it. What I'm saying is, if you're an Alpha and/or Beta customer and want a refund, check your local consumer laws to find out what your rights are, because regardless of what they claim, you do have rights.
Will you give people refunds?
We have started responding to requests where there is a clear outcome:
- Those who have pre-ordered an Elite: Dangerous release version from our online store and have therefore not yet played the game are eligible for a refund.
- Those who have already been playing the game online in the Alpha and/or Beta phases, regardless of whether they backed the project via Kickstarter or purchased access to Alpha and/or Beta through our online store, are not eligible for a refund.
As for those who had alpha and beta access. I'm pretty sure you guys can still get refunds (or at the very least partial refunds) if you want them. Frontier Developments is a UK business. And as per both US and UK consumer law, what they've done here can and does fall under "False Advertising" and "Bait and Switch". Both of which are illegal in both countries. Meaning anybody who bought the game on the premise that the game would include a full offline mode (and committed Frontier Developments to that promise/commitment at the point of sale) are entitled to a full refund, regardless of whether you are an alpha and/or beta purchaser. Although, technically, I think in the US they could get away with partial refunds by refunding the cost of the final game, but not the cost of the Alpha nor Beta access charges, because those could technically be considered as sold services rather than actual products. In the UK, I think it's more strict than that when considering many of the new UK Distance Selling laws that have recently taken affect. In the UK, I believe you would still be entitled to a full refund regardless of the Alpha and Beta access. But I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know for sure and don't quote me on it. What I'm saying is, if you're an Alpha and/or Beta customer and want a refund, check your local consumer laws to find out what your rights are, because regardless of what they claim, you do have rights.
Thanks, I won't.
A "review" is just platitudes. It's what politicians say. And that should be everything you need to know about that.
Believe it when it happens. Not before. Until then - the pressure remains on FD... and rightly so.
Nevertheless, I do think they've gotten the point... and nothing can happen on that front until after release. But we shouldn't let them think for a minute that everyone is OK with it now.
Last edited:
Retro? I really have to wonder about the world you live in. Okay, how about this? I'm gonna sell you a bag of oranges for $50. I am not going to give you actual physical oranges, I'm just going to describe what they look and taste like to you. I may even provide a scent sample of what an orange smells like. I am not however, ever going to really give you any real oranges.
Yeah, it's so retro to expect getting a real object in return for real money. If you are happy paying for smoke and mirrors, well, more power to ya I guess. Please have the courtesy of at least allowing people who expect more for their hard earned money, to have their own ideas of what value means to them.
Your post is true, but the fact remains that those "very VERY few" are still AFFECTED. They should be offered a full refund by Frontier Developments, even if they were online and playing for every minute of the alpha and beta phases. The fact that it seems like they won't (going by the FD responses people have quoted on these forums), is not on, because it means that they have apparently been suckered into paying to be testers for a product they will not be able to use.
I totally disagree... if it was not for those "cry babies" that man would have not had a dollar to spend making his dream.
"They can't have it both ways. Either stick to your campaign promises (which are what compelled people to fund the project), or offer refunds to those who ask for it when you bail on those promises.
Bail early if you have to, so you shed the people for whom the game you're now making isn't the game they want to fund/play. But you don't get to rattle off a list of stuff, each of which motivates different people to different degrees to decide to fund you, and then just ditch parts of that list at the end.
And I get that development can't be 100% predicted. That's why I'm saying they have to be proactive about these decisions AND allow for KS/Store refunds when requested.
You either allow for refunds, or you make damn sure you only promise things in your KS/Store campaign that you're actually doing to deliver, so that those who fund your project can trust that they're not standing on a rug that's going to get yanked out from under them at the end.
And for those who say, "but this isn't a store, it's an investor platform". That's disingenuous. Investors get to influence, if not outright dictate, business decisions. At no point was I or any other KS backer (the 'investors') consulted about whether they should drop offline support or soften their DRM-free commitment."
"They can't have it both ways. Either stick to your campaign promises (which are what compelled people to fund the project), or offer refunds to those who ask for it when you bail on those promises.
Bail early if you have to, so you shed the people for whom the game you're now making isn't the game they want to fund/play. But you don't get to rattle off a list of stuff, each of which motivates different people to different degrees to decide to fund you, and then just ditch parts of that list at the end.
And I get that development can't be 100% predicted. That's why I'm saying they have to be proactive about these decisions AND allow for KS/Store refunds when requested.
You either allow for refunds, or you make damn sure you only promise things in your KS/Store campaign that you're actually doing to deliver, so that those who fund your project can trust that they're not standing on a rug that's going to get yanked out from under them at the end.
And for those who say, "but this isn't a store, it's an investor platform". That's disingenuous. Investors get to influence, if not outright dictate, business decisions. At no point was I or any other KS backer (the 'investors') consulted about whether they should drop offline support or soften their DRM-free commitment."
Last edited:
Because FD tried to do the right thing and come clean as soon as they'd made the decision --even if that meant bad publicity just before the big launch event. If FD had waited until after the party, it would have been accused of worse manipulation.
Do the right thing (irrespective of whether FD are legally liable) and refund him his money and he goes away.
Ignore him, and even if he doesn't carry out his threats, there will be a long line of people behind him.
That's just the net effect of what Frontier have done here.
- Status