That's hardly a valid counter argument: trouble for trouble's sake? Not at all. More like trouble because I want either what I paid for or my money back. I've said it before, I'll say it again: I can assure you that once we get our money back, you won't ever see another post from me on this forum.
No Single Player Offline Mode then? [Part 2]
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
That's hardly a valid counter argument: trouble for trouble's sake? Not at all. More like trouble because I want either what I paid for or my money back. I've said it before, I'll say it again: I can assure you that once we get our money back, you won't ever see another post from me on this forum.
No doubt they will do something shocking over there to restore balance sooner rather than later and everything will be alright with the world again.
If they scratched the online aspect instead of the offline I would not be fazed on the slightest, just play offline. People are letting their emotions run wild over something that's NORMAL on a SW developement process.
If you think legal actions or card claims are going to make a difference, look at CIG. They've already broken 4 or 5 of their KS promises (and sometimes even without warning, like "Freelancer mouse" wich they are still not even acknowledging exists and are going extreme lengths to not to fulfill their KS promise). There was a lot of roars and that's all. No legal action, no card claims validated.
This kind of things are to be expected. I'm far more invested economically in SC and I know they'll break even more promises in the 2-3 years (remember release 2015? lol) of developement that is left. They have sooooooo many promises they are bound to break some. FD broke one. Big deal. Bethesda broke its promise of Radiant AI effectivenes in Oblivion (and it's still watered down in Skyrim) and the game did perfectly fine and was a greatly enjoyable game to play.
There are guys in Afghanistan in ToD playing Solo Online on a 20kbps conection without problems, so I doubt any of you posting so much would have a problem playing... unless all you wanted from offline was your universe to feel like you're special snowflakes and feed some sort of complex. There are many other games on which you are The Hero.
This game is and has always been about you and the world. About how to face the cutthroat world of 3300 and survive and even break even. Not about saving or conquering the galaxy. Otherwise we'd all be saviours/emperors of the galaxy within a week, and that's boring and immersion breaking.
If you think legal actions or card claims are going to make a difference, look at CIG. They've already broken 4 or 5 of their KS promises (and sometimes even without warning, like "Freelancer mouse" wich they are still not even acknowledging exists and are going extreme lengths to not to fulfill their KS promise). There was a lot of roars and that's all. No legal action, no card claims validated.
This kind of things are to be expected. I'm far more invested economically in SC and I know they'll break even more promises in the 2-3 years (remember release 2015? lol) of developement that is left. They have sooooooo many promises they are bound to break some. FD broke one. Big deal. Bethesda broke its promise of Radiant AI effectivenes in Oblivion (and it's still watered down in Skyrim) and the game did perfectly fine and was a greatly enjoyable game to play.
There are guys in Afghanistan in ToD playing Solo Online on a 20kbps conection without problems, so I doubt any of you posting so much would have a problem playing... unless all you wanted from offline was your universe to feel like you're special snowflakes and feed some sort of complex. There are many other games on which you are The Hero.
This game is and has always been about you and the world. About how to face the cutthroat world of 3300 and survive and even break even. Not about saving or conquering the galaxy. Otherwise we'd all be saviours/emperors of the galaxy within a week, and that's boring and immersion breaking.
Last edited:
Do you mean the Star Citizen thread?
-
The reason I don't post on there now is all down to the removal of offline for Elite. I can't exactly criticise that game for it's failings now that this has happened. All a Star Citizen fanboy has to reply with is "well, what about Elite offline then?" and it'll kill the argument dead. So I don't bother now
Each game should be judged on its own merits, not purely in relation to another game. Is ED feeling really polished, but lacking substance? Is Star Citizen very much not really in a playable state yet (aside from the silly deathmatch and racing stuff)? ED being released too soon in my opinion doesn't preclude the possiblity of a constant stream of cool new stuff down the line. Same with Star Citizen.
I don't see why a discussion about individual points has to cease now that Elite has "something against it". If the lack of a completely offline mode is the big elephant in the room for Elite, then I'm glad I backed this game
In an age and era of 'online gaming' of which covers so many games of today spanning a decade. I am actually quite taken back by the fact that some will just give it all up over no 'offline' mode. Already, we can play in solo mode and Mr Braben has already stated that the server code would be released should things go terribly wrong. If even third world countries can manage an avarage good internet speed and fully fit to run Elite: Dangerous. I fail to see how so many in westernized countries cannot.
Shok.
Shok.
Perhaps you should do a bit of reading in this thread and the previous one before making blanket statements like this.
I get that, but having played the previous versions of elite onwards, they were rather stagnant and boring when nothing really changed no matter what missions I took or how many I killed. It was lifeless and lacked soul.
Shok.
I remember FD saying that ED would not have a subscription.
Given that the 'vision' seems to require more online resource than originally thought, is voluntary purchases going to support the structure needed to keep ED going in the long term?
Is it reasonable to suspect that a charge will be introduced?
This is pure speculation, I have no reason to suspect this might happen other than an apparent funding gap.
Given that the 'vision' seems to require more online resource than originally thought, is voluntary purchases going to support the structure needed to keep ED going in the long term?
Is it reasonable to suspect that a charge will be introduced?
This is pure speculation, I have no reason to suspect this might happen other than an apparent funding gap.
Boring to you maybe, actually there are a lot of people out there, that love the "boring" aspects.
That's your opinion and you are entitled to have it, but please respect the opinion of others when they want the "rather stagnant and boring" offline experience.
So you're opinion is more valid/important than a person who's opinion wants offline mode?
Last edited:
I have the internet here, at home, but am going away at Christmas time, to somewhere I won't. Simple, really, so I ask you, what's so damn confusing?
I always thought sandbox games like Elite were about what you wanted them to be about, but maybe that's just me.
In any event, I like how you talk up fluctuating market prices and customised missions like as if they're going to make the game completely different or something.
There are several valid reasons for not wanting to play online, I've read more than I can remember. I, for one, have no interest in online gaming. Call me old fashioned, call me misanthropic (you'd probably be right), but for me a game is a personal experience that I do not wish to share with other people. I'd rather replay Deus Ex or Planescape: Torment for the millionth time than play an MMO. It's a matter of tastes: I just don't like it (and not just me by the way - take a look at the other 10001 post thread and you'll see). I don't want any external influence in my games, no matter how imperceptible. I realize and respect that this may be a difficult gaming philosophy to comprehend for some, but I am not asking for my view to be shared by anyone, I merely ask that it be respected and accepted without questioning it. I don't think I have to justify why I like the gaming style I like any more than why I prefer blue over red, rock over rap, women over men or football over cricket. It's just what I like.
Please remember to be on-topic and respectful to your fellow forum members while discussing this issue. Posts that are not in adherence to the forum rules will be moderated. Thanks for understanding.
Just a reminder of Brett's Post at the start of this thread.
A few personal comments are starting to sneak in.
Thanks everyone.
I don't disagree with any of your 3 points as a software developer of 16 years for a small firm, I am not blind to these difficulties and the especially where a higher ups are shall we say too enthusiastic vs the realities.
It is a cash driven decision, business always is. It has been considered to be not worth the expense to the business.
But businesses should not over promise and under deliver more so when they are accepting the public's money in advance. They may not of intentional gone out to mislead but that is the result.
I do say that the coders, artists and sound engineers have created a truly beautiful work. But even the thought of starting up the client is bringing a mix of nausea and rage. This whole thing they way it has been handled has kind of wrecked my fondest childhood gaming memories.
I'm not completely adverse to online multi-player gaming, played and enjoyed EvE online for many years. Some games I enjoy a more shall we say personal and enclosed rather than anti-social experience as the gated experience can be shared and enjoyed through conversation with others.
With the newsletter and the terms of service being as they are I may have no option but to keep it, not sure I'll ever be able to enjoy it again as I'd started too.
Last edited:
DB (intentionally?) missed to address refunds to the lower tiers of KS funders.
Yes, the monetary loss is not much there. But still, requesting a refund is mostly to show loss of trust and disdain.
nats
Banned
The fact is this discussion is irrelevant because they arent going to do a single player offline mode and if they ever do it would be a whole other game several years away. I do feel bad for the people who wont be able to play the game especially as its likely to be those that cannot afford a permanent broadband connection or cant get one at home for other reasons like parents wont allow access to one. But that is likely to be a temporary situation for most people. And I do think the online element is exciting if it allows a dynamic game far more so than an offline game and this is coming from someone who plays all offline games (well Steam solo games which I class as offline even though they are online). This is the only game I plan to play thats online and I dont really class this as online really because people will be few and far between in this game. Overall I think its the right decision but its a shame they didnt make it earlier.
- Status