No Single Player Offline Mode then? [Part 2]

[Juniper]

Of course they can't refund the games, because they need to pay their own bills and maybe even they hope to get some more players into online then, because if they have already paid for, why they shouldn't play at least online then?

We all have bills to pay, mate. I was happy to eat or drive a bit less if it meant the game I backed would be made.

I won't be playing online because an evolving MMO just doesn't interest me. I want to pause the game, save it, and have it exactly the same when I come back a couple of weeks later. As a working single parent, I certainly don't have the time to devote to playing a game every single day... and I'm really not one for having the rug pulled from under me all the time.

I also haven't "requested" a refund yet, because based on their legalese there doesn't seem to be much point for me. At most, I'd get my second copy of the game & expansion pack back... a tiny fraction of what I've wasted on this. Going by the letter of the law but behaving in an unethical way just leaves a very sour taste in the mouth.

Anyway, I was part of the last threadathon... and left because I've said all this ad nauseum, and it's as boring for me now as it is for everyone else, so I'm out of here. I just wanted to respond to Ed's post specifically in case someone there had a clue & risking getting caught up again.

Hitting 'unsubscribe' on the thread - if only I could do that for the game itself now.

 

[SalsaDMA]

You know what. I am glad they took a stance even if it was a painful one. It will spare us months of patches to get right, forums even fuller with complaints more'n we have now, and major disruption to the game once released. I am actually thankful Frontier Developments have spared us that headache. Again, I give them a big heart felt thankyou for that.

Shok.

you are making alot of assumptions all the time based on how you want things to be.

some day you will learn that things don't go like how you want them to be. Hopefully at that point you will look back at this charade by Frontier and recall your foolishness.

 

[AndyWeller]

If all you see is people moaning about an issue that's not that big, then perhaps you've missed the logical contradiction in that statement...



For all I know, that may true. It may be completely untrue too. But either way, you (or I or indeed anyone without a blue-bordered avatar) cannot control what such people post. All you can do is control what you yourself post...and by posting here, you're simply adding to a problem you perceive as going on past its sell by date. My advice to you (and to anyone else who feels the debate has gone on long enough) is simply not to post about it any more. Posting merely adds to the volume of posts, thereby keeping the topic alive - which is something you've said you don't believe is necessary.


Indeed. And these are people who are feeling emotionally bruised right now, and are (understandably) liable to lash out at anything. It's bad enough they have to deal with trolls and high moral horsemen, but when an obviously rational and well-meaning poster such as yourself then also pitches in with a comment about moaning, the genuine minority will (again understandably) likely lash out at you too, thereby creating the opposite effect to the one you intended. You meant no harm, but you may receive harm in return because emotions are stil running so high

It's like kicking a hornets' nest to stop the buzzing inside and then saying "Why are they attacking my foot now?"

If you can play E-D happily and offline isn't/wasn't ever an issue for you, then the best thing you can do right now is just walk away from this whole topic and leave those who were affected to continue the discussion for as long as they feel the need to.

No storm can last forever, but shouting at the lightning won't make it pass any quicker

An excellent retort and all points noted.

 

[Wolframium]

The newsletter is our widest communication so is where we put announcements related to the game. I don't think putting something in a newsletter that goes out to more of our backers than visit the forums is exactly hiding it.

Michael

I must not have expressed myself clearly: it was not my intention to suggest that you wanted to hide it. I meant what I said when said I have no reason to think that anyone at FD had less than honest intentions about the game. What I am puzzled with is the fact that in the newsletter, the news was reported as one would comment the cut of a minor feature, thus giving the impression that you did not expect it to be important to so many players, so what I was wondering is: is that actually the case? Were you expecting fewer people to be affected, and were you not expecting those who would be affected to be so passionate about it?

Anyway, I realize you have already answered one of my questions and you cannot engage in personal exchange with everyone, so I will understand if you will not reply any further.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Space Dandy]

I see your point, but at all stages the game is the one that we've set the vision for so ultimately we have to make the decisions. We've always been quite clear on that point.

Michael

While I do not argue any conspiracy theories all this could have been avoided if you guys had put on your big boy pants and made the decision to make the refund policy less stringent since David Braben and this company claimed offline was going to be a mode in this game throughout the alpha/betas.

 

[CMDR Beardie.D]

And that is being looked into - however we have to be careful that our refunds policy is consistent.

Michael

To be honest refunds shouldn't be your worry, honouring what you have promised should be your main concern!

We have had an offline mode so far so why can this offline mode not continue to exist?

I understand there are features that can only exist in an online environment but the mere fact an offline mode has worked so far shows that SOMETHING is possible. So why not provide what you can for offline players with the understanding they wont experience the same experience as online mode. Which by the way is a load of rubbish, im well aware of the number s involved in such a large playable area however the home pc isnt a lame donkey! There must be infact no there is a way to simulate the multi-player environment in an offline mode, yes the offline mode wont have special events but it can have a fluctuating market and AI players. With regards to something i read about needing a super computer just to handle the galaxy map queries this is ridiculous as well constructed queries can be done in millionths of a second and dont require a super computer. Dont forget your ship can only jump so far, there for thats how far your query needs to reach.

Also regarding the comment that offline mode would hinder the online mode development, i understand this but surely not enough to drop it, which within dropping offline mode has effectively meant you have dropped a large number of your backers!

Personally i havent played offline mode much as i have internet and feel the experience online would be better, however when purchasing a game that is advertised as providing both online and offline i am happy with my purchase as if my internet goes down or if i choose to no longer be online i can still play ED to some extent. However now the value of ED has dropped by 50% as you have removed half of the game so surely EVERYONE is due a refund of sorts!?

I would never buy a game that is online only as this means you have to trust that the company responsible for the online content doesnt just give up, go bust or simply couldnt give a monkeys! And so far you dont give a monkeys about your customers/backers by dropping offline mode just because its a bit harder! So what you started it so finish it! Its not impossible to do.

I am contemplating a full refund myself via legal routes simply based on the fact i do not intend to purchase an online only game due to the future proof issue despite that fact 99% of my play time has been online mode. We as the consumers have choices and if ED dont deliver there promises then we the consumer will take our custom and money elsewhere.

I really hope the decision of offline mode is reversed and a compromise is made between online and offline modes.

 

[mbpoblet]

To be honest refunds shouldn't be your worry, honouring what you have promised should be your main concern!

We have had an offline mode so far so why can this offline mode not continue to exist?

I understand there are features that can only exist in an online environment but the mere fact an offline mode has worked so far shows that SOMETHING is possible. So why not provide what you can for offline players with the understanding they wont experience the same experience as online mode. Which by the way is a load of rubbish, im well aware of the number s involved in such a large playable area however the home pc isnt a lame donkey! There must be infact no there is a way to simulate the multi-player environment in an offline mode, yes the offline mode wont have special events but it can have a fluctuating market and AI players. With regards to something i read about needing a super computer just to handle the galaxy map queries this is ridiculous as well constructed queries can be done in millionths of a second and dont require a super computer. Dont forget your ship can only jump so far, there for thats how far your query needs to reach.

Also regarding the comment that offline mode would hinder the online mode development, i understand this but surely not enough to drop it, which within dropping offline mode has effectively meant you have dropped a large number of your backers!

Personally i havent played offline mode much as i have internet and feel the experience online would be better, however when purchasing a game that is advertised as providing both online and offline i am happy with my purchase as if my internet goes down or if i choose to no longer be online i can still play ED to some extent. However now the value of ED has dropped by 50% as you have removed half of the game so surely EVERYONE is due a refund of sorts!?

I would never buy a game that is online only as this means you have to trust that the company responsible for the online content doesnt just give up, go bust or simply couldnt give a monkeys! And so far you dont give a monkeys about your customers/backers by dropping offline mode just because its a bit harder! So what you started it so finish it! Its not impossible to do.

I am contemplating a full refund myself via legal routes simply based on the fact i do not intend to purchase an online only game due to the future proof issue despite that fact 99% of my play time has been online mode. We as the consumers have choices and if ED dont deliver there promises then we the consumer will take our custom and money elsewhere.

I really hope the decision of offline mode is reversed and a compromise is made between online and offline modes.

Unless you're referring to the tutorials, I think you might be confusing online solo (which is still in the game, for now) with offline...

 

[Scharnhorst]

I think there's been a fair bit of throwing money at FD without reading the small print here by a lot of consumers: People who weren't (and in some cases still aren't) aware of what a gamble KS pledges are as well as people who jumped into buy something on the store page without actually checking what they bought (myself included there tbh but I'm not looking for a refund).

I have no idea how ASA or Trading Standards are going to treat it, specifically the promises/hopes for an unfinished product made by the devs outside of the actual store pages. I'm just trying to find my receipts for some other alpha/betas that I'm participating in to see if it's actually a standard routine.

The STORE page during beta said "Single Player Offline". The print wasn't small, it was large..

 

[T@F]

Also what the stance on a refund for the unlimited expansion?
As the company's word means jack to me now.

 

[Shoklar]

you are making alot of assumptions all the time based on how you want things to be.

some day you will learn that things don't go like how you want them to be. Hopefully at that point you will look back at this charade by Frontier and recall your foolishness.

I think I have mentioned the scenarios pretty well actually, rather than "assumed", with thousands of new players, disruption and patches, lag for downloads or slow downloading all lead to one thing - people whining here. I backed the game for nostalgia reasons and although it would've been nice to get a drm free copy. I won't throw all that away and pout, kick and scream until red in the face, just because something went wrong and demand a refund. Perhaps this is the difference between us that's deemed "fanboys".

Shok.

 

[amigacooke]

I won't be playing online because an evolving MMO just doesn't interest me.

I will be playing online, but not because it's an evolving MMO, but because it's Elite.

I feel sorry for some of the most enthusiastic, engaged and energised community members who made clear from the beginning that lack of offline was a deal breaker for them. Sadly, there doesn't seem to be a good way out of this, only less bad ones.

 

[Drexen]

We've always been clear that the game is first and foremost a multiplayer game. Multiplayer and the evolving galaxy were the two core pillars that set this as something new and special for the Elite series. Without those there wouldn't have been a new game at all. Back in the kickstarter we believed that we could support offline play as well, but as development progressed the scope expanded considerably and more of the game had to held online for it to work as intended. We've constantly examined how we could hive off some of that work in a separate offline mode but that has proven not be the case.

Michael

It is not impossible to produce a solo offline experience of a good enough quality given enough resource. I think it's a little insulting to our intelligence to say that the solo offline was dropped for technical reasons. What is true is that it is not possible to produce a solo offline experience of a good enough quality within your self-imposed time limits and the resources you are prepared to spend on it. The bottom line is that it would have too much of a negative effect on Frontier's bottom line. In other words, it is just not worth the money Frontier would have to spend for the return you believe you would get back from the investment. I can appreciate this. You're a business. Frontier made a mistake, if not by promising (yes, you did not use the word "promise" but the word "will" is good enough) to include solo, then certainly by failing to realise sooner that it would not be possible given the criteria above.

Of course, this raises the question of whether or not you did in fact know sooner and decided to withhold the information. One of the questions I have raised and have seen raised by others is when exactly the decision was made. The answer has either been vague or you have avoided giving one altogether. How long was the time period between making the decision to drop offline and announcing it last Friday. "Recently" is not an answer. I know you don't have to tell us but by withholding this information it only makes the situation more suspect. How long did you sell the Beta (maybe even Alpha) to people, knowing that there was not going to be an offline mode?

As to the refunds, I expected that pre-orders would be refunded because you have no choice. It's the law. Any good Trading Standards Officer would have jumped on that one. There is no good will in this action. I did not think that you would refund Alpha/Beta/KS as that would expose Frontier too much financially. In this case the gain in good will was not worth the loss of cash, in your opinion, and your intention was just to ride the storm. Again, it's a business decision. You make the decisions that make or save you the most money. Hopefully it will be the right one for Frontier.

I'm a £200 level backer from last year. I am not applying for a refund. I do not want a refund. I have a fibre connection. Solo offline would have been a nice to have but I can live without it. I would like you to continue and make the best game you possibly can and continue to improve and build upon it as long as you can and I have faith that you will do this. However, I still believe you have treated some people badly.

 

[deusx_ophc]

Ditto, and you're not the only one warming up the presses for a chargeback, I'm already making initial discussions with my card processor and they're quite happy to make it happen if FDEV do not honour a refund, they believe I've got grounds for claim based on the paperwork I've submitted, and unless FDEV are willing to make a good will effort to resolve the situation prior, they've already said that the moment I'm told I'm not entitled to a refund and submitted proof they've denied my request, they'll initiate the process along with a note stating that they will take notice of other, similar claims.

Unfortunately the ship skins I was fool enough to run through paypal so I will have a long, slow haul to get any form of refund out of them, and I can only do that after I've fired the claim off, but I'm in a position where I -can- do these things.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it >:| Oh, and Frontier Developments, I sincerely hope enough chargebacks hit that you get put on the suspect merchant list, because the only language you understand it seems is that of fire. I have no quarrel with anyone here, and I'm sincerely sorry it's come to this, nor do I have any quarrel with most of the staff or moderators involved, because frankly this is not their fault. But whoever decided this boneheaded legalese method of sledging their customers is good thinking needs to be hung out to dry.

talk all you like, take action all you like. cool.

calling others top take action not so cool. but hopefully this community knows better.

specially as in this case, what you are doing is borderline. both visa/mastercard have a 6 months chargeback timeout, many uk banks only 90 days after statement, they will not go beyond that. and auctioning a chargeback will always result in the other party (FDEV) having their say, too. in this case you are outside the eu directive (that is very pro-consumer) on chargebacks with your claim. for one thing chargebacks beyond EUR 150/GBP100 are not possible anyway.

if the chargeback is refuted, have fun taking on the cost of that plus the issuing bank and the credit card company tend to take a dim view on this, too. many banks have closed accounts of customers knowingly auctioning chargebacks.

#justsaying

 

[Michael Brookes]

Michael,

Thank you for taking time to address some of the concerns expressed in this thread.

My specific concern is that I backed to the level I did during Kickstarter in order to secure the premium boxed set - a standalone product that would allow me to install and play the game in ten years time. That boxed set is now worthless to me. I can't help but feel a bit (albeit unintentionally) scammed. If you're not prepared to give refunds to backers (and I do realise what a can of worms this is), would you maybe consider offering a refund of a fixed amount against delivery of the premium boxed set reward?

As I say - the refunds policy is being reviewed - I can't add anything beyond that I'm afraid.

Michael

 

[Deyn]

I see your point, but at all stages the game is the one that we've set the vision for so ultimately we have to make the decisions. We've always been quite clear on that point.

Michael

Don't get me wrong, I criticize the way you handled the decision process, especially the communications. Not the actual decision, though I may n ot like it.
I've been in similar situations and had to make cuts to features clearly required and wanted in Enterprise projects. Less stakeholders though, so much easier to get an agreement, due to reasoning.
What I had hoped for, was to be given the possibility to tweak the vision a bit, with everybody involved.

Now, as harm is already done, it's all about minimizing the damage. I hope the launch on 16th Dec works well! Another near desaster is not what we need now.

 

[Michael Brookes]

It is not impossible to produce a solo offline experience of a good enough quality given enough resource. I think it's a little insulting to our intelligence to say that the solo offline was dropped for technical reasons. What is true is that it is not possible to produce a solo offline experience of a good enough quality within your self-imposed time limits and the resources you are prepared to spend on it. The bottom line is that it would have too much of a negative effect on Frontier's bottom line. In other words, it is just not worth the money Frontier would have to spend for the return you believe you would get back from the investment. I can appreciate this. You're a business. Frontier made a mistake, if not by promising (yes, you did not use the word "promise" but the word "will" is good enough) to include solo, then certainly by failing to realise sooner that it would not be possible given the criteria above.

Of course, this raises the question of whether or not you did in fact know sooner and decided to withhold the information. One of the questions I have raised and have seen raised by others is when exactly the decision was made. The answer has either been vague or you have avoided giving one altogether. How long was the time period between making the decision to drop offline and announcing it last Friday. "Recently" is not an answer. I know you don't have to tell us but by withholding this information it only makes the situation more suspect. How long did you sell the Beta (maybe even Alpha) to people, knowing that there was not going to be an offline mode?

As to the refunds, I expected that pre-orders would be refunded because you have no choice. It's the law. Any good Trading Standards Officer would have jumped on that one. There is no good will in this action. I did not think that you would refund Alpha/Beta/KS as that would expose Frontier too much financially. In this case the gain in good will was not worth the loss of cash, in your opinion, and your intention was just to ride the storm. Again, it's a business decision. You make the decisions that make or save you the most money. Hopefully it will be the right one for Frontier.

I'm a £200 level backer from last year. I am not applying for a refund. I do not want a refund. I have a fibre connection. Solo offline would have been a nice to have but I can live without it. I would like you to continue and make the best game you possibly can and continue to improve and build upon it as long as you can and I have faith that you will do this. However, I still believe you have treated some people badly.

As David as mentioned it wasn't dropped purely for technical reasons. There is little that is impossible, but impractical is a different issues as is not achieving the core pillars of the game.

Michael

 

[Only]

As I say - the refunds policy is being reviewed - I can't add anything beyond that I'm afraid.

Michael

Hi

if the refund policy is changed, I assume we will all be told so those that purchased beta etc and have already been refused can re-submit ?

 

[Solei]

RPS article on ED refunds:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/11/20/elite-dangerous-refunds/#more-250967

 

[Renideo]

Obviously you haven't been "clear" since you guys specifically stated that offline would be part of the product.

It doesn't matter what you think is the primary or secondary. Bottomline is that you stated it would be part of the product, and as thus you SHOULD HAVE DESIGNED THE PRODUCT to encompass this.

Instead the vibe you are giving us is that you totally ignored offline during the prelimanary and latter design, with some weak notion that you couold probably hack out something afterwards, and then when you started actually looking at the code just diecided to ditch it because you realized the corner you had designed yourself into would cost money to get out of.

YOUR choice and incompetence in design shouldn't leave you free of responsibilities towards the promises you made about what the product would be.

By your claims, you could just as easily have made a platformer instead ala mario bros, and claimed that "stuff change, live with it" like you are trying to do now.

It's unethical at best and cause for no amount of love from the people you wrong by this.

Look I'm sorry but this really is moronic. However poor the communication was on this (and it was, as they have belatedly admitted), they made precisely the game they set out to make(including a mode of play which requires 1996 era connectivity at most). They did intend to allow for a fully offline mode and they stated as much on the kickstarter (albeit way down the page), and they have explained the process by which they arrived at this point, and at this decision. if you have opted to conclude in defiance of all rational thought that it must be malice despite the abundance of more likely possibilities, including those explicitly given that is frankly your look-out.

But please stop inflicting your banal sentiments on everyone else. It's been a week, enough's enough.

 

[amigacooke]

As David as mentioned it wasn't dropped purely for technical reasons. There is little that is impossible, but impractical is a different issues as is not achieving the core pillars of the game.

Michael

The thing is, I thought that offline mode had been established as one of the core pillars of the game.

Silly me.