Let people run their own dedicated ED server, just like many if not all multiplayer PC games allow, especially those on Steam. If you have the hardware...why not try it.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Let people run their own dedicated ED server, just like many if not all multiplayer PC games allow, especially those on Steam. If you have the hardware...why not try it.
Come back in 2 years, or 5, or 10, when the server are shut down, and see if you still don't care that you won't ever be able to play Elite Dangerous again.
For Pete's sake, some people bought a new PC, a HOTAS, rudder pedals, Oculus Rift, some even built themselves a simpit just for ED! I know that in 20 years I'll still be able to play Mass Effect, Freelancer, GTA V... But what about ED? Well if FD stick with this decision we better enjoy the game while it last, for who knows how long that will be.
Stop being so childish. One of the reasons it is this late is that they delayed the decision until they were absolutely sure that it wasn't feasible. Now you're going down the road of doom. Honestly, whilst I sympathise somewhat with those who were affected by this announcement (it is disappointing if a feature you were really looking forward to, cannot be delivered); the way forum-goers are reacting to it, is the same way when I tell my little one he can't have another Muller-Rice. I can understand anger, but I was always taught to take a step back and think, even when angry, before I opened my maw.
Once again - the announcement is a disappointment, but that's all it is. I don't think you'll get a refund, but if it is truly game-changing for you, just go elsewhere. There's no point covering these boards with useless venom.
Me neither. I've been suspicious ever since they added solo on-line without any mention of solo off-line
For a procedurally generated content? Funny. Is your hard drive 1000 terra now? And somehow you play without downloading this 1000 terra every evening.
That's a polite phrase to use, instead of "mandatory online DRM requirement", which ED just became. Did you not learn from the SimCity fiasco? What happens when the servers are down, or Frontier decides to turn them off in a few years?
No offline mode? No expansion/DLC/store purchases then.
It doesn't matter if it's not a promise, it's an expectation that has been built with the aid of FD.
The late disclosure of this late plan change also leaves a lot of people who pledged or bought into beta feeling that if they built the galaxy in a manner that they could not simulate it offline, this should have been divulged earlier. Or at least every time someone asked about it, they should have gotten a resounding "I don't know." or a "Maybe, let's see..." never a "Yeah, there will be an offline mode, last time I checked, but the simulation will be static/reduced."
As to those saying that this thread is pointless, you've clearly not been active in the community (not that I've posted a lot, but I read). FD have repeatedly listened to beta feedback and changed or added features that weren't planned. This thread only doesn't have a point if FD doesn't care, and that's clearly not been the case. I'm not saying they'll just do whatever the community wants, but they might find a compromise, give a good enough explanation to satisfy most, or just say "we're sorry". Communication is never pointless, unless you expect the outcome to be exactly what you want.
The reaction is that much worse because instead of coming clean and saying "oops, we ran out of money/time..." or "we programmed ourselves into a corner" or "we simply didn't prioritize offline during planning and now it's too late to include in the release" or whatever else is also apparently true, we get a perky newsletter that makes absence of offline seem like a feature. Common! It's a compromise at best, don't make it sound good. And don't try desperately to get people to sign up to Beta (3 times, if I counted right) on the same letter you're going back on what you planned. And don't, for heavens sake, through bribes so we won't be upset.
Planning failed, we get that, but the biggest problem here is the stupid PR on this newsletter.
The late disclosure of this late plan change also leaves a lot of people who pledged or bought into beta feeling that if they built the galaxy in a manner that they could not simulate it offline, this should have been divulged earlier. Or at least every time someone asked about it, they should have gotten a resounding "I don't know." or a "Maybe, let's see..." never a "Yeah, there will be an offline mode, last time I checked, but the simulation will be static/reduced."
As to those saying that this thread is pointless, you've clearly not been active in the community (not that I've posted a lot, but I read). FD have repeatedly listened to beta feedback and changed or added features that weren't planned. This thread only doesn't have a point if FD doesn't care, and that's clearly not been the case. I'm not saying they'll just do whatever the community wants, but they might find a compromise, give a good enough explanation to satisfy most, or just say "we're sorry". Communication is never pointless, unless you expect the outcome to be exactly what you want.
The reaction is that much worse because instead of coming clean and saying "oops, we ran out of money/time..." or "we programmed ourselves into a corner" or "we simply didn't prioritize offline during planning and now it's too late to include in the release" or whatever else is also apparently true, we get a perky newsletter that makes absence of offline seem like a feature. Common! It's a compromise at best, don't make it sound good. And don't try desperately to get people to sign up to Beta (3 times, if I counted right) on the same letter you're going back on what you planned. And don't, for heavens sake, through bribes so we won't be upset.
Planning failed, we get that, but the biggest problem here is the stupid PR on this newsletter.
Far be it from me to engage in technological elitism (pun intended) but if you lack the ability to download and run a game online you shouldn't have opted to support a product that to the best of my recollection was never specifically mentioned to be available on CD/DVD media. These days just about everyone has some sort of connection to the internet and users are growing every day. If the concern is for the few times when your service goes out then you really need to reassess things whether it is your ISP or ability to have patience.
I want to throw Moore's Law into the ring. In 10 years, our gaming machines will laugh at the work required to have the server software running as a background service in parallel to the game. Releasing a (maybe limited, less dynamic) version of the server software would be a way to solve this conundrum.
(In fact, I always assumed the offline mode would be the game client connecting to a local, standalone, feature-limited server application. This has been done in other games in the past, too.)
Edit: I'd also like to repeat what I said in the newsletter thread: Cancellation of the offline mode is equivalent to the cancellation of the game itself to some people. People who backed the game, followed it, engaged in the forums, became emotionally invested, probably spent hundreds of hours of their lives in the process - and are now left empty-handed.
Last edited:
When I read the newsletter all I could say out loud was "Braben, you ****"... like many others we have backed this project for the purpose of getting out hands on the offline version of this game to be reassured time and time again that a truly Offline mode would be available...
It does read "single player has to connect to the server from time to time, but this has the added advantage that everyone can participate in the activities that can happen in the galaxy. A fully offline experience would be unacceptably limited and static compared to the dynamic, ever unfolding experience we are delivering."
Time to Time is so vague... sounds to me like a constant connection is required... and maybe I don't want to participate in the activities in the Galaxy... been robbed of MY choices... so much for the idea of making my way through the galaxy if it is depended on other players actions...
Then again it is his game and his way to build it... but still annoys the snot out of me... it is a (short name for Richard) move by FDEV
It does read "single player has to connect to the server from time to time, but this has the added advantage that everyone can participate in the activities that can happen in the galaxy. A fully offline experience would be unacceptably limited and static compared to the dynamic, ever unfolding experience we are delivering."
Time to Time is so vague... sounds to me like a constant connection is required... and maybe I don't want to participate in the activities in the Galaxy... been robbed of MY choices... so much for the idea of making my way through the galaxy if it is depended on other players actions...
Then again it is his game and his way to build it... but still annoys the snot out of me... it is a (short name for Richard) move by FDEV
I think it is very possible to have offline mode, but just as blizzard did with the PC Diablo3, Act. with Call of Duty, and EA with Battlefield3-4, they want to control your experience. If you believe, they can create a virtual galaxy that is 400 billion systems, but don't have the ability to make it offline, you are very gullible. If the software exists on an online server that runs all the code transactions, it can exist at home, on your computer.
Last edited:
This is what concerns me. What f something happens and frontier or some other entity is forced to shut off the servers.
By bye Elite possibly forever.
By bye Elite possibly forever.
Michael Brookes
Game Director
The problem here is that you'd have access to the server which isn't something we'd want to allow as it contains the secrets of the galaxy. Which was also an issue with an online version.
Michael
What, you mean apart form the DRM-free physical media, playable in solo off-line mode that I pledged for?
Have you actually read the thread? For many of us, it isn't about the availability of an internet connection - it's about what happens when the lights go off at FD.
It seems like you guys at Frontier have been working on a totally different product than the game you promised in the KS campaign - and kept us in the dark with false promises all the way along.
Instead of a full-fledged self contained game, we now only get a client for which an Internet connection is mandatory
Making fools out of the kickstarter backers who helped Frontier starting this project is a very bad idea.
I am disgusted.
Instead of a full-fledged self contained game, we now only get a client for which an Internet connection is mandatory
Making fools out of the kickstarter backers who helped Frontier starting this project is a very bad idea.
I am disgusted.
Last edited:
Limit Theory (developed by 1 person) is going for a fully procedural generated galaxy, yet Frontier with a hell of a lot more are unable to do this and store the data locally?
Those Affected By Removal Of Offline Play
I'll point out I am not affected by the revelation that ED will no longer support offline mode. My 2 main homes have superb always on Internet, but I do feel for people who have been subject to something of a bait and switch here so I want to offer some advice based upon a very similar thing that I fought and won this year.
First thing, this is only for people who bought from the Store, and really it's for EU citizens. I also have a home in the US and I think there are similar state laws, or even that the transaction may be covered under EU law anyway, but I am no expert.
The law is very clear on this, all such products MUST detail at purchase time any constraints around their maintenance and delivery. This includes functions impacted by DRM or other technical matters: "“functionality” in relation to digital content includes region coding, restrictions incorporated for the purposes of digital rights management, and other technical restrictions; "
"(j) where applicable, the functionality, including applicable technical protection measures, of digital content;" - this is a section about what must be made known to the buyer at purchase time. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-and-additional-payments-regulations-2013.pdf
The above are sections from UK law but this law is pan-EU and intended to bring all the EU into step, so just use your local version.
If offline is important to EU citizens who pre-ordered from the Store I advise the following:
Email FD Store and ask the outright question - "will ED feature completely offline play as originally promised" - and give them a reasonable deadline to reply, say 3 working days. Just do this right now to start the clock ticking on them.
Screen shot the KS page and any other pages evidencing offline play, the numerous posts on this forum from mods and devs, as an example. An unscrupulous company (not saying FD are, I just think they are badly managed) may change this page. I actually have a copy of this page if anyone needs it.
Bookmark the cache archive for the offline page in case FD switch it (they seem to like switching things): https://web.archive.org/web/2014111...arter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous
Raise a dispute immediately with your credit card company or other payment provider, don't wait for FD to get back to you, just raise it immediately to be sure you are covered
If you are outside the Dispute window then you need to raise it using the Consumer Credit law of your country, which will protect you by a charge back or similar mechanism. In the UK this is Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act and I used this to get a £1000+ refund on software that was subject to similar mis-selling, just this year.
Anyway, when you have your answer you then reject goods on the basis that the restrictions around functionality were not made known at the time of purchase. This alone is enough but you could then point out the misleading info on the KS page to cement things, if you choose.
If FD ignore you then you send them an email before action on the basis of their announcement and pursue action with your credit card supplier.
In the EU, FD are absolutely out of line on this one and do not have a hope of denying an EU refund simply because they did not make known the restrictions on functionality at the time of purchase. Again I will say, before any off premises contract is made the supplier must make known, "the functionality, including applicable technical protection measures, of digital content". Also the supplier must make know support issues such as, "because it is online only it will be end of life when we switch servers off".
Anyone is welcome to PM me for more detail on how I won my case this year using these very same laws.
If you are not bothered, then please don't respond with anything, I am just trying to help the people who I know are bothered. I know many people will disagree with me, I would rather you PM'd me to flame me rather than derail a thread intended to help others.
I'll point out I am not affected by the revelation that ED will no longer support offline mode. My 2 main homes have superb always on Internet, but I do feel for people who have been subject to something of a bait and switch here so I want to offer some advice based upon a very similar thing that I fought and won this year.
First thing, this is only for people who bought from the Store, and really it's for EU citizens. I also have a home in the US and I think there are similar state laws, or even that the transaction may be covered under EU law anyway, but I am no expert.
The law is very clear on this, all such products MUST detail at purchase time any constraints around their maintenance and delivery. This includes functions impacted by DRM or other technical matters: "“functionality” in relation to digital content includes region coding, restrictions incorporated for the purposes of digital rights management, and other technical restrictions; "
"(j) where applicable, the functionality, including applicable technical protection measures, of digital content;" - this is a section about what must be made known to the buyer at purchase time. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-and-additional-payments-regulations-2013.pdf
The above are sections from UK law but this law is pan-EU and intended to bring all the EU into step, so just use your local version.
If offline is important to EU citizens who pre-ordered from the Store I advise the following:
Email FD Store and ask the outright question - "will ED feature completely offline play as originally promised" - and give them a reasonable deadline to reply, say 3 working days. Just do this right now to start the clock ticking on them.
Screen shot the KS page and any other pages evidencing offline play, the numerous posts on this forum from mods and devs, as an example. An unscrupulous company (not saying FD are, I just think they are badly managed) may change this page. I actually have a copy of this page if anyone needs it.
Bookmark the cache archive for the offline page in case FD switch it (they seem to like switching things): https://web.archive.org/web/2014111...arter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous
Raise a dispute immediately with your credit card company or other payment provider, don't wait for FD to get back to you, just raise it immediately to be sure you are covered
If you are outside the Dispute window then you need to raise it using the Consumer Credit law of your country, which will protect you by a charge back or similar mechanism. In the UK this is Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act and I used this to get a £1000+ refund on software that was subject to similar mis-selling, just this year.
Anyway, when you have your answer you then reject goods on the basis that the restrictions around functionality were not made known at the time of purchase. This alone is enough but you could then point out the misleading info on the KS page to cement things, if you choose.
If FD ignore you then you send them an email before action on the basis of their announcement and pursue action with your credit card supplier.
In the EU, FD are absolutely out of line on this one and do not have a hope of denying an EU refund simply because they did not make known the restrictions on functionality at the time of purchase. Again I will say, before any off premises contract is made the supplier must make known, "the functionality, including applicable technical protection measures, of digital content". Also the supplier must make know support issues such as, "because it is online only it will be end of life when we switch servers off".
Anyone is welcome to PM me for more detail on how I won my case this year using these very same laws.
If you are not bothered, then please don't respond with anything, I am just trying to help the people who I know are bothered. I know many people will disagree with me, I would rather you PM'd me to flame me rather than derail a thread intended to help others.
- Status