If I understand offlinegate correctly (and I may not since I was resting from the forum most of that time), it was small claims court (UK) claims that eventually got FD to repay for people who said than an offline mode was a show stopper, but had played in the alpha and beta.Does a kickstarter project have to be a product? Or can it be say a collection of cash for a class action lawsuit
I am sure that would get some attention in FD.
I an only kidding of course but same as many others I would love to hear from FD on the matter.
DDF and their "god-like powers"
- Thread starter Carsten
- Start date
I think that some people like it when threads with criticism go awry, so they can be closed down.
- - - Updated - - -
I think the bad press, and the threat of legal action (and the resulting extra dose of bad PR) was enough - I don't think anybody actually went to court, but I may be wrong.
This later post of yours shows that you do now accept that your sentence was wrong, and that there was an entitlement, and that that entitlement was correct. Of course, there was never any doubt that the promise was made, as it has been reproduced many times on here, including much higher up this thread. I suggest we leave it there, given the moderator presence.
stramash? Hmm.. is that what i'd call a hoo-ha? You mean the scandal?
And no, it achieved something, but it didn't get offline implemented
Erm, nope, because, you are quoting unrelated things. The first point was related to a (side-)discussion that i derailed onto about expectations (not entitlement, although i could have waxed lyrical about the entitlement of some people as well
), and not contingent of whether FD did promise or not.Hehe, its almost like someone saying "Oh, bleedin' hell, its the rozzers!"
stramash? Hmm.. is that what i'd call a hoo-ha? You mean the scandal?
And no, it achieved something, but it didn't get offline implemented
I actually almost wrote hoo-ha.
But then I went all native. The "campaign" was only a partial success, I'd agree, as most people affected wanted offline introduced rather than their money back. But given they weren't even going to get that from FD, it was a half decent result.
I don't believe the DDF failed, I feel that we failed it
Your comment is unfair.
I and some of the others did a tremendous job devoting a large portion of our own personal time helping FD flesh out their ideas to make a better game. That in itself speaks volumes about the commitment we gave. Sure, there were times when we locked horns in dispute over a point that may have become heated, but that's the nature of being asked to comment about something everyone was personally invested in.
As time went on it was obvious FD were busy - posts would remain up for months, FD failed to comment; even now Sandro's thread of "i'll be back" is how old ?! However, how long does it take to put a post up to say hello ? To devote a few minutes to the DDF to say anything ?
No, the DDF was a great idea and it went well until the end ..
Last edited:
Yeah, I guess you're right. You, FDEV staff, failed it.I don't believe the DDF failed, I feel that we failed it
Not we, the DDF members.
Yeah, I guess you're right. You, FDEV staff, failed it.
Not we, the DDF members.
Whilst Kerrash has enjoyed some extra privileges through FD (which is hardly surprising given he's a nice chap) your comment is a little unfair.
You have to remember that moderators are not FDEV employees.
I suspect the remark had nothing to do with moderating. Ambassadors, Squeeeee and NDA's on the other hand ...
Maybe. More unfair in my opinion is the implication that DDF backers have failed the DDF.
I know that.
Last edited:
As I wrote in the DDF, I think Kerrash's relationship with the devs have left him with an attitude of defensiveness when it comes to the game, the people, and their decisions. This has, it seems, spilled over into a mild form of attack against those he sees as being critical of FD. Human nature really, if any other of us were as obsessed as Kerrash is with FD (he got a freakin' tattoo for goodness sake) then we might be the same.
FDEV would not let it go to court, that be plain silly. though they settled in at least a small number of cases only after the relevant legal papers (letter before action) were delivered.
that is only hearsay, but then again this is the internet ^^
and to add on another point. jabokai & cosmos suggesting that posts/this thread is getting shut down because they are uncomfortable... very helpful. but then exactly the kind of helpful posts these ddf member have been making about all aspects of this game for as long as i can remember. well cosmos was mainly a bit hot & cold in a funny & smart way as i recall ^^
and no that isn't a personal attck, just an observation
Funny, when I log on to these forums, I see Design Decision Forum.
View attachment 57437
That said (and shown), I've always treated it as Design Discussion Forum, as I never had any illusions other than that FDEV calls the shots.
I think the PAIWBIF is also appropriate considering the proposals you spoke of came from FD themselves (and not the DDF)
and to add on another point. jabokai & cosmos suggesting that posts/this thread is getting shut down because they are uncomfortable... very helpful. but then exactly the kind of helpful posts these ddf member have been making about all aspects of this game for as long as i can remember. well cosmos was mainly a bit hot & cold in a funny & smart way as i recall ^^
and no that isn't a personal attck, just an observation
Yeah, got to agree there.
I wish I could have made as solid a contribution as your good self - I often read your posts and thought "wow, amazing, how can anyone come up with that!". Differences of opinion on where the game ended up, decisions that were made, shouldn't matter - both Cosmos and I contributed from the heart throughout the process until, at the result of the process, it was clear that all of us had, for the most part, wasted an awful lot of breath.
Probably just the ones they were promising when they were taking players money. Perhaps repetition is the key to enlightenment...
In most "civilized" cultures an offer to provide a good or service once accepted and paid for at an agreed price constitutes a legally binding contract.
This discussion seems to be unable to focus on that fact. It's not about whether or not anyone agrees with the what or why of what FD did when they made those promises.
It's about breach of agreement, plain and simple.
Said over and over and over and over...
Last edited:
I have found a God-like power you can all have today, for free. Enjoy. You are welcome.
Is that a hint that we will get rainbow lazorz? If so, we can consider the god powers issue closed!