No Single Player Offline Mode then? [Part 2]

[foxpur]

If a company - ANY company cannot AFFORD to be run in a moral and legal way then it shouldn't be allow to operate - PERIOD.

I myself have been a small business man in the transport sector for close on 20 years and understand the exingencies of the open market. I wasn't given a 'get out of free jail' card when I first started operating and had to wait for the monthy cycle of billing roundabouts to come my way. If I had crossed that legal line and attempted to shaft my suppliers or customers I would have been dealt with faster than a cut cat.

........... but then again I'm ONLY a small businessman ............. and undeserving of corporate considerations eh??????????

Since they haven't technically don't anything illegal yet because they haven't actually produced anything there is no comparison. Again, same as before... it's not done cooking, and the ingredients changed. If they were a fully finished release and THEN said it, that WOULD have been illegal.
They did nothing actually against the law, over-zealous perhaps, but not wrong for what it was.

 

[fenix67]

You are 100% correct! Give people their refund and most of us if not all will be gone!

Sad to see players leave this game, because of internet problems. I've been gaming for 30+ years, seen much advancement in quality. the last series of space sims i've played is the X series from egosoft, i moved to ED because of the quality and focus of the game and feel that games like Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen are the future. the X games are great single player games but they are missing what elite and star citizen can offer. Sadly though, i think they both will only have that edge with internet based server connection, mostly due to the market system and the fact you can switch to multplayer at anytime.

I wish all well who are unable to stay due to this issue. hopefully things change and you come back at a later time cheers fen

 

[Baragoon]

I bought the beta and played the HECK out of it, I'm bored now Oh! also! I'm outraged at the offline issue, I want a refund!
I was a kickstarter backer and spent a lot of money on my pledge, now some bills have come in and ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!
I played the original Elite, I got the beta straight away, but now it turns out I don't have enough time ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!
I love the game! I pledged a LOT, but I'd rather just have paid the final price, unfortunately I've already paid for ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!

I'm sorry that your mind works in this way and you think everyone seeking a refund is shyster. But please do not project this kind of attitude on everyone, it is not helping anything.

 

[Jonbe54]

Since they haven't technically don't anything illegal yet because they haven't actually produced anything there is no comparison. Again, same as before... it's not done cooking, and the ingredients changed. If they were a fully finished release and THEN said it, that WOULD have been illegal.
They did nothing actually against the law, over-zealous perhaps, but not wrong for what it was.

EXACTLY the answer I was expecting from someone with your background.

I WON'T derail this thread because of my opinions of your profession. You will certainly have heard them before anyway.

 

[fenix67]

Redacted

Nobody got scammed!!! things happen and go wrong, they found they coudln't do it the way they first said. so they had to change there plan. Its not the end of the world apply to get your money back and go play a single player game. the X series are the closest. people need to chill and go through the channels. THAT INCLUDES both sides of the argument!!!!!!

 

[foxpur]

I bought the beta for 75$ and that includes beta access AND the the mercenary edition of the game. You are paying 25$ for beta access the other 50$ is for mercenary edition.

At least that was the price break down WHEN I bought into beta.

Regardless though HOW they handle this matter shows their ethics or lack of and how they view their clients.

The 75 was for the Beta Donation, the game was a bonus for donating to the cause.
If you want to see that as a ethical point... that's like paying Red Cross and then saying you want it back because they don't buy tents anymore... Ok, there are lots of obvious flaws in that but the ethical balance is the same, Ethics is individual perspective (There is a law set of Ethical Law, it's REALLY confusing)

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

EXACTLY the answer I was expecting from someone with your background.

I WON'T derail this thread because of my opinions of your profession. You will certainly have heard them before anyway.

Oddly, I'm on your side.
BUT, I have to see it from both directions. From a business side, they are in the right. Kind of enforced devil's advocate.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Not my issue what the real reasons are for people asking for refunds. If FD was STUPID enough not to fulfill their pledge. They only have themselves to blame!

I can tell you that I have no bills to pay and have not downloaded or played ED. What else I can tell you is that I donated a small amount on the day one of the kickstarter project and significantly larger amount after I was told that there is going to be an off-line mode & this will be DRM-free project. Take it for what is worth.

Cheers,

I bought the beta and played the HECK out of it, I'm bored now Oh! also! I'm outraged at the offline issue, I want a refund!
I was a kickstarter backer and spent a lot of money on my pledge, now some bills have come in and ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!
I played the original Elite, I got the beta straight away, but now it turns out I don't have enough time ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!
I love the game! I pledged a LOT, but I'd rather just have paid the final price, unfortunately I've already paid for ... oh! hang on! I'm outraged at the offline issue! I want a refund!

 

[Jonbe54]

The 75 was for the Beta Donation, the game was a bonus for donating to the cause.
If you want to see that as a ethical point... that's like paying Red Cross and then saying you want it back because they don't buy tents anymore... Ok, there are lots of obvious flaws in that but the ethical balance is the same, Ethics is individual perspective (There is a law set of Ethical Law, it's REALLY confusing)

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



Oddly, I'm on your side.
BUT, I have to see it from both directions. From a business side, they are in the right. Kind of enforced devil's advocate.

Look I'm not having a personal snipe, I don't know you so I'm certain you are a wonderful person but my opinion of your profession and the role they have played in undermining the system they are pledged to uphold is simply unprintable here or anywhere else so lets just move on away from the legal side of things.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Nobody got scammed!!! things happen and go wrong, they found they coudln't do it the way they first said. so they had to change there plan. Its not the end of the world apply to get your money back and go play a single player game. the X series are the closest. people need to chill and go through the channels. THAT INCLUDES both sides of the argument!!!!!!

All perfectly reasonable if they were issuing refunds.... but they are not!

 

[foxpur]

Decision and communication that "off-line" mode is going to be removed should have happened long before beta-testing. If this was communicated to everyone and refund option was offered FD would not be in this mess! *****<<<< Like it or not they only have themselves to blame >>>>*****

That's pretty much true. Based on what I saw, and read, they kinda tried and when they got this close to starting they realized it just wasn't gonna work, but they very likely tried till it was just too obvious. They couldn't FIND that out till the rest of the game was getting on as finished however, that's obvious and makes logical sense.

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

Look I'm not having a personal snipe, I don't know you so I'm certain you are a wonderful person but my opinion of your profession and the role they have played in undermining the system they are pledged to uphold is simply unprintable here or anywhere else so lets just move on away from the legal side of things.

hehehe, not offended. I gotta follow those too. Although I usually am on the other side of writing the contracts preparing for this.
Some laws I just LOVE (did you know you can't take a horse in the law library...why the heck is that a law?)

 

[Papa Smurf]

Sad to see players leave this game, because of internet problems. I've been gaming for 30+ years, seen much advancement in quality. the last series of space sims i've played is the X series from egosoft, i moved to ED because of the quality and focus of the game and feel that games like Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen are the future. the X games are great single player games but they are missing what elite and star citizen can offer. Sadly though, i think they both will only have that edge with internet based server connection, mostly due to the market system and the fact you can switch to multplayer at anytime.

I wish all well who are unable to stay due to this issue. hopefully things change and you come back at a later time cheers fen

It is my deepest hope that this will end well and that FD doesn't make this type of mistake again. Slay some pirates for me!!!

 

[talshiarr]

Come on, guys, let the Buffalo snow storm inspire you. Get this pile of noise to 20,000 posts before Gamma.

Seriously, though, is there anything that hasn't been said six ways from Sunday yet? I'm disappointed in how they handled it, and that they're unwilling to even consider refunds to backers who say offline was their primary motivation. I have no reason not to take them at their word, but playing devil's advocate how would Frontier know if some people didn't try to take advantage of that situation and then buy back in later on? In my opinion it wouldn't be enough people doing so to affect Frontier dramatically given the informal poll threads showing ~80% of people have no intention of asking for one.

 

[Papa Smurf]

That's pretty much true. Based on what I saw, and read, they kinda tried and when they got this close to starting they realized it just wasn't gonna work, but they very likely tried till it was just too obvious. They couldn't FIND that out till the rest of the game was getting on as finished however, that's obvious and makes logical sense.

David Hostetler explained it very well about 8 hours ago... Give it a read it won't hurt (much)

_________________________

Well, there you have if folks. Newsletter #50 makes it painfully clear: "This whole issue comes down to what the vision is of the game we are making..."

Like I said: we entered into this with mutually incompatible visions of the game, we just didn't know it.

And: "Is offline mode an impossible problem, or just unfeasible? It is a creative decision, not wanting to produce an empty game."

This was a choice, not an unavoidable consequence of technical or even budgetary constraints. Braben/FD *CHOSE* not to develop a game that matched the things they originally said which convinced us to give them our money.

Sure, they can mince words about it if they want, to shirk the moral obligation to provide refunds or any kind of recompense to those of us that didn't read between the lines and understand that they were making an online-only, multiplayer-only, DRM-laden game.

Vision can be communicated clearly, early, and unambiguously, and they didn't do that. Many of us have said unequivocally that if this had all started with the tagline, "Elite: MMO", we would've run the other way.

How many of us would've opened our wallets if Braben had stated originally that "an offline game is an empty game" and "cloud processing and always-online entertainment benefits everyone"?

They never really committed to or believed in the value of an offline Elite, and it's clear now that at every step it was the runt of the litter for their efforts, if even that.

"Do you now consider Elite: Dangerous to be an MMO? Technically, it has always been."

They were disingenuous about the project from the beginning, and gave lip service to several things in order to secure a higher level of backing than if they'd come clean on their real motives at the onset.

This is so much worse than if they'd really just had to scale the project or postpone some features until a later release. People understand that aspect of game development.

I'm a 15yr veteran software developer (native platform, web, and server) and you don't suddenly discover that you've got a product that can't manifest without significant centralized rack resources and a persistent network connection. They knew with each day they developed that they were entrenching that into the game, and they did so purposefully and without transparency to us regarding the sacrificial consequences it was creating for other promised features.

 

[Jonbe54]

That's pretty much true. Based on what I saw, and read, they kinda tried and when they got this close to starting they realized it just wasn't gonna work, but they very likely tried till it was just too obvious. They couldn't FIND that out till the rest of the game was getting on as finished however, that's obvious and makes logical sense.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Ok so taking this to my sphere of expertise . . .

I enter into a contract with a large transport organization to sub contract a particular run for them with a definite performance criteria.

I need to capitalize this venture with a new vehicle purpose fitted out to facilitate the timely delivery of that contracted service.

The company supplying that fitting out fails to properly configure the vehicle but continually promises to make good on their promise until at the very last minute they say . . . sorry we made a mistake and can't do it for you at the price requested.

I go to the large transport company and confess that my supplier cannot configure my vehicle to specifications necassary for the satisfactory achievement of those performance criteria.

They will sue the @rse off me for breach of contract and I will in turn sue the @rse off the supplier for leading me up the garden path.

There is only one winner in this scenario - not the large transport company who lose consumer confidence through failed delivery of promised service - not me through the loss of a valuable contract - certainly not my supplier who gets royally reamed from both me and the now thoroughly ticked off large transport company.

Guess who wins . . of course I don't need to tell you do I?

 

[mbpoblet]

Dammit, I go to sleep for a few hours and we get a whole new thread!

I hope it's not much inconvenience if, for ease of quoting (why won't the forum let us quote posts in closed threads?) I repost a couple bits here.

First and most importantly, a lot of people seem to wonder why we want an offline mode when we already have solo online.

Let me just quote the replies to Braben's same question:

Have you played the game? Why is the offline (as opposed to single player, which I understand) mode so important to you?

For many of us, we pledged a large amount of money because we believed we'd still be able to play the game if FD went under. I personally would not have pledged to that level without such an assurance. Also, the premium box set reward is now worthless to me on those terms. In short, I haven't received the game I pledged for.

I'll continue to support the game, I'll definitely be playing it, but I do feel that it's important that you understand why some of us are unhappy with the situation.

If I may say this for myself:

Now, I know MMOs are popular, fancy and lucrative these days, but don't you think that you are pushing it just too far with your MMO only (tunnel) vision?
I am not an online multiplayer game player, never have been and never will be.

Sometimes i need to check the baby, answer the phone or door or do some work. And now I can not even pause or save the game and continue the battle in progress later. I want an immersive experience and that doesn't include other gamers.

I also want to play the game where I don't have an internet connection, and when the FD servers are down (or have been shutdown, or FD no longer exists). I don't want to rent my game, I want to buy it, no forced authentication, no DRM, no server connection. Reason ??
Except from constant bullying and incomodating your customers?!
Simply for long term assurance the player will be able to play the game long into the future regardless of what happens to FD, without wishing to sound horrible but if the company folds one day (as many games studios sadly do over time) the game can still be played for many years to come, and maybe even be modified and supported by the community if the developer is no longer in a position to do it themselves, there is many such games still being played today with this exact scenario where the original developer & publisher have long
gone but the game still lives on supported by a dedicated community, having a game which is solely dependant on the survival of either makes me very nervous, history proves this sadly. Not to mention server overloads, connection failures, high ping or simply lack of internet access while we are on the trip or somewhere where internet is not available.

So that is why offline mod is important for many players

For me personally it's not about the multiplayer - but about SAVE GAMES.

Roguelike / 1-shot play is fine for some games, but not long term rpg sims. Imagine spending weeks building up something and then crashing during docking or a glitch / drop in connection / PC crash and losing everything? No save game to go back on...

Also, if the game is so vast and to be played over many years...what happens when your servers go down? remember Gamespy?

I'm sorry to jump in on this, but I hope I can throw a few answers in:

- Offline allows me to have a self-contained galaxy that is "just mine" - sounds selfish, but this is why I love games like Skyrim, Frontier: Elite 2 etc.
- Offline worlds mean I can leave the game world, and not play for a week or a month and come back knowing everything is as I left it.
- Offline worlds (from an emotional level) feel more 'vast' to me personally, because I know everything out there is untouched.
- An offline game is 'mine' forever, and I know I will still be able to play in it 30 years from now (just as I can with the original Elite).

All of the above are very important to me, and are why games like Skyrim and Frontier: Elite 2 are at the top of my favourite games of all time.

I'm going to let this guy answer it because he put it better than I ever could. But it's true, real, and touching.

Been told to post this here, fyi I'm not angry only regrets, but I'd like this post added to this big heap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do I want to play a game I own and have a right to play but through no fault of my own I sometimes can't?
Do I want to play a game with some corporate monstrosity looking over my shoulder watching my every move?
Do I want to play a game where I can be bullied or ripped off by some quick fingered 12 year old (either directly or indirectly)?
Do I want to play a game where arbitrary rules and conditions are injected into my world that will dictate my freedom to chose what I do and when I want to do it?

I am surprised just how strongly I feel about it, but as an 84er it can't be some sudden snap reaction.

Like many I've also thought long and hard about why I regret the sudden loss of Elite D offline and my reasons actually feel strangely deep and personal, almost spiritual you could say .

Call me mad (yes I'm mad) because I'm not even sure if my regrets are entirely rational:
~
I have regrets because I still think I look cool dancing to Spandau Ballet, but I secretly know I don't.
I have regrets because I still think it's great to have big hair, but when I'm honest, I know it's not.
I have regrets because I still find Blondie absolutely stunning but some now say she isn't.
I have regrets because I still believe I have no responsibilities, but the wife says I do.
I have regrets because I still think I'm young, but my kids keep saying I'm not.

I have regrets because I still hoped that I could be that geeky, sleep deprived teenager playing space games on my own late into the night in my own universe surrounded by a reality that only I commanded, no rules, that felt free from an awful, commercialised, bullying world, that was fresh and that as a young frustrated adult was the only true space in my life that was truly mine (all mine!) and the only place that at this point (or that point) in my life I could affect or influence in any meaningful way, it was my escape, it was selfish but it was mine and I was the only one watching and the only damn one in it.

So now 30 years later, I'd hoped, as an old(ish) man, when the discos over and younger one's gone, even after the lights and servers finally dim, that at least I'd be there sat, left all alone playing in the dark but as happy as Larry in my own bit of space, that I'd thought was all mine.

And now after this week I think that this my last little personal fantasy has gone too.

An offline mode insures that, no matter what happens to Frontier or the servers, the game will still be playable.

It also allows for the game (in its offline version) to be modded. This enriches the community and the game with content beyond even that which the developers themselves can produce (just look at Betheda's games), and ensures a long life for the game.

Look at Freelancer for an example of a similar game whose servers closed years ago, but which is still kicking and keeping a loyal community thanks to private servers and modding.

An offline game also lets it be DRM free (no matter the intent always-online is, by its own nature, a form of DRM, and even if it's not perceived as such by the developers, it is by a lot of potential customers).

An offline game would probably allow you to pause, thus allowing people who sometimes need to take care of children or other urgent issues to play without risking a loss of progress.

An offline game means, thus, more sales for Frontier (both from people who don't support online-only games, people who don't support DRM, and people who simply don't have a constant or reliable connection), and a much longer life for the game.

While I can't answer for the other guy, I can answer for myself and why I personally asked for a refund of my £105 pledge once you told us you ditched offline.

I have plenty of online games already in my library. I used to be a hardcore raider in WoW and frankly got disillusioned with the attitude and inherent behavioural patterns that emerge in people when they see things as an 'online race' or 'online competition'. I want to be able to just relax when I play my games, and the ability to actively pause and do something else (like painting some of my miniatures, or pet my cat that suddenly wants attention) shouldn't impact on my ability to enjoy a game. It does impact in the 'need to be online' games, especially when you can't pause them (which is kinda natural for online only games).
Add that the game feels incredibly punishing with no way of 'starting over from an old save', and your product is just plain un-fun to me if it needs to be online.

Also, I have several games in my collection from years gone by that required connecting to servers to work, and these games simply don't work anymore because the company(ies) behind them either ceased to exist or decided that it was simply not profitable anymore to carry the luggage that those games were. A noteworthy 'poster child' in this kind of thing is "Hellgate London" which I bought at release. The guys behind that particular game were noteworthy and had decent experience while they created a nice game. Their desire to keep a persistent online component running all the time eventually meant that they couldn't cover running costs, though, and the company went bust. Even so, I am still able to play that game in its offline mode if I want to (and it's actually a nice game in that mode), but if they had forced the consumers to only be able to play online, that too would have been a 'dead' game for all intents. The offline mode keeps it alive for me to be able to play.

So basicly my reasonings are twofold.

I want the ability to play at my own pace, with saves and reloads, without being forced into some ratrace that playing with others will naturally put me into (I seem tor ecall you even said yourself that resources would dwindle in areas in the online version as players took them)

and I want to be sure that I can always pick up the game and play it again later on, when everyone else forgot about it, because >I want to play at that time< (and not when some guy running your servers think it is opportune).

A purely online version is just inaccetbale to me, especially as the originals were offline.

These are my feelings about offline mode, too.

There are three things about offline mode being important:
1. making the game moddable. Not every modder wants to cheat. Some want simply to enjoy the game in another way than intended.
2. being independent of server issues and even network availability. I have a rig powerful enough for gaming at my workplace and enough time at hand sometimes, yet I couldn't run anything over network. If there was network traffic from games I might be in trouble, so I unplug the cable.
3. it's an emotional thing. If I buy something I don't think about renting a license or such, I want to own the game! I love my shelf with old game boxes. In the recent light of content removals from, e.g. GTA Vice City and GTA San Andreas: those games on my shelf still have the music, those on Steam have not.

I might possibly have missed some, but this should give you a good idea.

 

[Papa Smurf]

That's pretty much true. Based on what I saw, and read, they kinda tried and when they got this close to starting they realized it just wasn't gonna work, but they very likely tried till it was just too obvious. They couldn't FIND that out till the rest of the game was getting on as finished however, that's obvious and makes logical sense.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Ok so taking this to my sphere of expertise . . .

I enter into a contract with a large transport organization to sub contract a particular run for them with a definite performance criteria.

I need to capitalize this venture with a new vehicle purpose fitted out to facilitate the timely delivery of that contracted service.

The company supplying that fitting out fails to properly configure the vehicle but continually promises to make good on their promise until at the very last minute they say . . . sorry we made a mistake and can't do it for you at the price requested.

I go to the large transport company and confess that my supplier cannot configure my vehicle to specifications necassary for the satisfactory achievement of those performance criteria.

They will sue the @rse off me for breach of contract and I will in turn sue the @rse off the supplier for leading me up the garden path.

There is only one winner in this scenario - not the large transport company who lose consumer confidence through failed delivery of promised service - not me through the loss of a valuable contract - certainly not my supplier who gets royally reamed from both me and the now thoroughly ticked off large transport company.

Guess who wins . . of course I don't need to tell you do I?

You can take the horse to water but you can't make it drink... All the evidence is here right in front of you if you are willing to look at it with open mind.

 

[Space Dandy]

The 75 was for the Beta Donation, the game was a bonus for donating to the cause.
If you want to see that as a ethical point... that's like paying Red Cross and then saying you want it back because they don't buy tents anymore... Ok, there are lots of obvious flaws in that but the ethical balance is the same, Ethics is individual perspective (There is a law set of Ethical Law, it's REALLY confusing)

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



Oddly, I'm on your side.
BUT, I have to see it from both directions. From a business side, they are in the right. Kind of enforced devil's advocate.

Hogwash, what is legal and what is right is two different things and you very well know it. Ethically what they are doing is wrong even if legally they can do it.

It is like when a car company KNOWS their product has a defect but ignore it because it is cheaper to settle the here and there lawsuits rather than issue a recall to have the issues fixed, funny thing is though they will often do the recall to have issues fixed if the car is an older model or simple fix.

Sadly most companies will do what is cheaper for their bottom line and screw the rest.

Anyways I planned playing this online any hoot and have said my piece BUT this company has lost any respect I had for it and will get no more money from me.

 

[foxpur]

the sacrificial consequences it was creating for other promised features.

Yep, read that.... only comment on it all is the very last line.... The word promised.
They were NEVER "promised", they were "proposed".
That distinction is rather a major point here. Many saw it as absolute, but it wasn't. Technically it wont be until the 16th of Dec. They COULD do it again and the situation is the same (they would be insane to do it again).
It is a semantic difference that causes so many people complaining to think they have a right to it.
What a "proposal" is, is a Wish List.
(That's why it says 'Kickstart Project Proposals")

 

[Goilveig]

I'm a 15yr veteran software developer (native platform, web, and server) and you don't suddenly discover that you've got a product that can't manifest without significant centralized rack resources and a persistent network connection. They knew with each day they developed that they were entrenching that into the game, and they did so purposefully and without transparency to us regarding the sacrificial consequences it was creating for other promised features.

I won't believe anyone has worked for 15 years in the software industry without having personally scrapped a lot of features for many different reasons.

The problem they came up with wasn't that they couldn't move server code onto the client - it was that if they did that, they wouldn't produce a fun game. Not only that, in the time it would take to create the sub-par experience for the 5% of the backers that demand offline play, they could instead create more features for the 95% that will play the more fully featured online game. I manage development for one of our company's products, and there are plenty of things in the "someday maybe" list of features that would benefit some portion of our customer base, but haven't yet been the best bang for our development buck.

 

[foxpur]

Sadly most companies will do what is cheaper for their bottom line and screw the rest.

Very true