No Single Player Offline Mode then? [Part 2]

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
I am struggling to reconcile the notion that offline-play does not have the appeal (demand, player numbers) of multiplayer with FD's apparent need to hang on to the money of such a (logically) insignificant number of offline-only players.

Maybe they're just sticking by the letter of their T&C's and any sales laws of the relevant country/s as opposed to 'needing to hang onto an insignificant amount of money?
 
But you've coded in a lot of other languages too in those 20 years right? Or was it more like 5 years or so of coding then 15 in architecture and design?

This is quite off topic and we can continue in PM if you are interested in my career. However in short - you never quit coding even when you became senior architect, proof of concept snippets, test cases, etc... On the other hand if you divert to managing positions you could eventually stop coding and start managing people and other resources. Regarding other languages I'm familiar with few other programming languages.
 
I'm C/C++ developer with 20+ year of experience in coding, designing and testing complex projects. From my point of view all those excuses from FD and DB looks to me that they have broken design and that Offline Mode is really completely new project for them and I believe them. However, I can not stand the impression that not only design is broken but the development process was badly managed and that they ended in dead end with offline mode due to poor project management. Whatever the reason is, handling this matter in FD manner never resulted in good outcome for the company. Dropping the ball few weeks before final release with such explanation is pretty much insulting. I presume there are lot of old folks around here just like me 40+, who do see this as very poor and unfair attitude. I don't care if they will refund me my money or not - whatever the outcome is DB and FD are done deal for me.

I just chalk it up to bad planning management. But certainly not worth going all out and doing the hurt "I'm gonna take my ball home and play with other kids"... The product being released is awesome, it is sadly it's not going to have offline, would have been helpful, but as a game it's great. Loss happened, badly presented... we got that... They feel bad, we feel bad... NEXT...

Seriously, I am 50+ and I still say you look like a child running off the playground... you can do better. Be better than others, show forgiveness and understand for a hard choice and teething issues for a new system and move on.
 
A curious, though oft stated, viewpoint. My own view is that if the online crowd didn't keep popping in and stoking the fires with the very same statements again and again this thread would have fizzled out days ago. Apart from sporadic eruptions as yet more backers got the bad news.

Your own post is but a repetition of many others before it, and yet you felt the need to say it anyway.

I wish to see peace among those in the community, altruistic perhaps, but you asked.

There are those who fan the flames yet you choose to focus on me, the one who wishes for peace, ironic.
 
Shame. :eek:

Shame on those <insert expletives plus livid description of mental shortcomings here> who sent/send those threats. :mad:

Shame. :eek:

Now it will be that all 0.00001% of insignificant numbers of offline backers are not only pirates but murderers and criminals :D

P.S. Just to be clear, i do not approve threats on anyone over this.
 

Vlodec

Banned
I am struggling to reconcile the notion that offline-play does not have the appeal (demand, player numbers) of multiplayer with FD's apparent need to hang on to the money of such a (logically) insignificant number of offline-only players.

I suspect Cathy that they're afriad that many who really aren't interested in the offline game will nonetheless pretend to be in order to get a refund and then buy the game for a much cheaper price. If so you can see their point.
 
Last edited:
Maybe they're just sticking by the letter of their T&C's and any sales laws of the relevant country/s as opposed to 'needing to hang onto an insignificant amount of money?

If that is so, the bad will and knock to their reputation (personal as well as corporate) is not worth it.
 
I don't know at the moment - probably until the review is complete unless it falls into a clear cut category already.

Michael

I'm going to post this again, and as a reply to this, because there's been no reply to it.


Those that are eligable under our current rules have been processed and we're looking into other cases.

Michael

Not in my case they haven't. My initial request for a refund was for the Elite: Dangerous - Lifetime Expansion Pass, A pre-order bought and paid for from your shop.

My first attempt was dismissed using the fact I was a Kickstarter Backer as an excuse... saying kickstarter pledges are not refundable (something I'm already aware off). That's not what I was asking for.

I opened a second ticket pointing out the mistake and AGAIN asked for a refund for the Elite: Dangerous - Lifetime Expansion Pass, A pre-order bought and paid for from your shop. Apparently the matter is now under investigation.

Since all undelivered pre-orders are entitled to a refund, I'm not sure what there is to investigate. So, to go back to the above quoted post, no, not all eligible under your current rules (i'm one of them) have been refunded.
 
The final game was already been purchased as part of the beta program bundle in some cases after explicit confirmation that it would have included offline mode. Those purchasing the game "standalone" have no issue since their refund requests are accepted, but those who bought the game as part of the beta program bundle should also receive partial refund, since the full final version of the game was part of the price paid.

No. The payment was for entry into the beta program entitling the tester the final game for free as way of a "thank you"

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

^This. It's quite clear beta includes the provision of the full game.

Can I also say I'm not one of the people asking for a refund. I wanted offline mode however I'm willing to give online a go. However I strongly believe anyone that wants one should be entitled to one and I'm willing to speak up to protect other peoples rights.

It doesn't include the cost of the full game. The payment was for entry into beta and early access to the code. The final game is provided effectively free as a way of thanks for participating in the beta.
 
Good lord no! thieves? I was aware that some people have wondered what would stop those who get a refund for a big old kickstarted pledge or early beta from just buying the cheaper game when it comes out. But I haven't read anything about them being called thieves.

They'd lose their perks (reserved names, insurance discounts, Collector's Box Sets, starter ships, decals, etc, etc) so I don't think there would be many that actually liked and wanted to play the game that did that. However, I'd concede that there would probably be a few. So a few gits get a few pounds - meh, I'd say it wasn't a big concern, but that's merely speculation.

I myself requested a partial refund, but just to make a point and show solidarity with those truly affected... if they actually offered that partial refund (zero chance, I do not fit the criteria) I'd just refuse it anyway! ;)
 

Vlodec

Banned
I wish to see peace among those in the community, altruistic perhaps, but you asked.

There are those who fan the flames yet you choose to focus on me, the one who wishes for peace, ironic.

You're altruistic. That's nice. I never met an altruistic person before, but then given the social circles I mix in perhaps that's not so surprising.

And I didn't "focus" on you. I responded to your post, as you might expect people to do.
 
Sorry to hear you’ve had personal threats over this Michael, however upset I am over the decision and however it has coloured my view of Frontier and my wish to spend money with you guys in the future I do not feel that threats are justified in any way shape or form it is at the end of the day just a game.
 
I suspect Cathy that they're afriad that many who really aren't interested in the offline game will nonetheless pretend to be in order to get a refund and then buy the game for a much cheaper price. You can see their point.

But anyone who did that would lose out on other rewards that cost money, e.g. the life-time free expansions. Also the in-game goodies like default access to Sol. You may be right in that's what they're thinking, but add that to the loss of reputation and good will... I'm still struggling to reconcile it.
 
A curious, though oft stated, viewpoint. My own view is that if the online crowd didn't keep popping in and stoking the fires with the very same statements again and again this thread would have fizzled out days ago.

That is very much not true. We have plenty of posts by accounts that are a day old or less, whether they are legitimate or not, declaring how unsatisfied they are. And of course the whole debate about refunds, DRM, the future of ED if FD were to shut down, etc.

Just chalking this up to the "online crowd" is too easy. Or did you mean the "offline crowd"? Either way, my point stands ;)
 
This is quite off topic and we can continue in PM if you are interested in my career.


Hmm, I've just apologized to a moderator for possibly taking up their time needlessly so I will only say this:

I think that people would be happier, and maybe derive more enjoyment out of projects, well, ENDEAVOURS, like Elite: Dangerous ,if they just assumed that the people developing them were competent. I'm sure that you have a lot of experience, many people in these forums do.

I do think that not many have the kind of experience with developing games that the ED leadership has. So I would personally feel a little awkward describing my work experience and then using that grounding to judge someone like DB.
 
I'm going to post this again, and as a reply to this, because there's been no reply to it.




Not in my case they haven't. My initial request for a refund was for the Elite: Dangerous - Lifetime Expansion Pass, A pre-order bought and paid for from your shop.

My first attempt was dismissed using the fact I was a Kickstarter Backer as an excuse... saying kickstarter pledges are not refundable (something I'm already aware off). That's not what I was asking for.

I opened a second ticket pointing out the mistake and AGAIN asked for a refund for the Elite: Dangerous - Lifetime Expansion Pass, A pre-order bought and paid for from your shop. Apparently the matter is now under investigation.

Since all undelivered pre-orders are entitled to a refund, I'm not sure what there is to investigate. So, to go back to the above quoted post, no, not all eligible under your current rules (i'm one of them) have been refunded.
Hazarding a guess but your account was flagged as kickstarter and they missed the detail whilst rushing to get through them? A possibility at least :)
 
No. The payment was for entry into the beta program entitling the tester the final game for free as way of a "thank you"

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



It doesn't include the cost of the full game. The payment was for entry into beta and early access to the code. The final game is provided effectively free as a way of thanks for participating in the beta.

I disagree. Pre - order price 50 dollars - Beta access 25 dollars if bought seprate both from the store. Total price 75 dollars. This statement is just playing with numbers. Total price of beta with pre-order or not is 75 dollars. You are still paying for the Retail game in both cases regardless.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom