No Single Player Offline Mode then? [Part 2]

[Zuikaku]

There is one funny thing about copy protection. There were developers who were so obssessed with copy protecting their products that their game failed. Just remember Silent hunter3Silent Hunter4 who forced players to be allways connected. And that ended very badly, cause many players who paid for the game were unble to play it properly.

On the other hand, you have projects like Witcher, whose developers do not care at all about protecting their product. And it was and is huge financial success. They even once hinted they wanted it to be pirated. so that even people who would never play that type of game try it. and many of these bought the game to support developer after they liked pirated version.

The bottom line is that copy protection can be counterproductive. Yes ,it is needed. But the moment the copy protection starts to interfere with normal gameplay, than it is nothing more than bullying loyal customers who paid for the game.

Quality of the game is a key to success. Overall copyprotection isn't.

 

[SuBSynk]

It is really sad to see how easily people succumb to the "you don't own it, you licence it" logic pushed by the media behemoths.

People should be shouting for improving their local consumer protection laws. This is already happening in the EU: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/top-eu-court-upholds-right-to-resell-downloaded-software/

And the worst part of the "you don't own it, you licence it" is not that you can't sell your old games. It is that it actually stiffles creation of new games. If companies have an ad-infinitum steady stream of income from their existing titles, they have much less incentive to create new ones.

When you enter a user agreement with a company you take on all sorts of rules that define the way you play said game. Everything from the way you can use chat to the use of content and of course the ability to sell said product to another person.

It is a contract and if you break it then you can be removed instantly for breaching the contract, very simple and imo a great way to ensure a good gaming environment. Without these types of ToS hacking, exploits etc would run rampant and the developers would have no teeth, with a decent ToS they can lifetime ban troublesome players without having to mess about.

 

[phlOgistOn]

That's funny. About ~9000 posts ago people were saying, all we want them to do is say sorry.

So they say sorry. Then they said, all we want them to do is refund us. So now they're looking at refunds.

He's even gone as far as saying he'll review the decision (to throw offline out) after release, and you don't believe him.

Just saying. Is this the point where I run and duck?

Give an inch...

 

[Papa Smurf]

That's funny. About ~9000 posts ago people were saying, all we want them to do is say sorry.

So they say sorry. Then they said, all we want them to do is refund us. So now they're looking at refunds.

He's even gone as far as saying he'll review the decision (to throw offline out) after release, and you don't believe him.

Just saying. Is this the point where I run and duck?

Key word "LOOKING" at refunds. I'm gone once they issue refunds to us. It has not happened yet... so words are cheap and they have 0 credibility. Saying sorry is a small step but needs to be supported with actions... not talk of actions.

 

[Riktar]

That's funny. About ~9000 posts ago people were saying, all we want them to do is say sorry.

So they say sorry. Then they said, all we want them to do is refund us. So now they're looking at refunds.

He's even gone as far as saying he'll review the decision (to throw offline out) after release, and you don't believe him.

Just saying. Is this the point where I run and duck?

While some have changed their have been others who wanted a refund from the get go and then they in fact said "sorry" was good enough.

As for future trust: Its earned, and when it comes to the price, thats different depending on who you talk to.

But I think its pretty universal that the cost of trust becomes much higher to "earn back" once it's lost,,,,,,

But that's me,,,,,,,,,,

 

[mbpoblet]

That's funny. About ~9000 posts ago people were saying, all we want them to do is say sorry.

So they say sorry. Then they said, all we want them to do is refund us. So now they're looking at refunds.

He's even gone as far as saying he'll review the decision (to throw offline out) after release, and you don't believe him.

Just saying. Is this the point where I run and duck?

It's very easy to lose trust.

It's very hard to regain it.

The damage was done the moment they chose to "reveal" this change the way they did, if not earlier (when they decided not to offer an offline mode, for instance).

It's way too early to tell how significant the damage will finally be, and how long it will take for it to be fixed to any significant degree (if it even can ever be fixed).

 

[1500]

Yes you are right... 10,101 pages of people seeing their praises and telling FD how great they are!

LOL its that many posts, not pages, good god the drama you make up. Most of those posts made by a small number of people. Heck for a while it was just 3 posters responding to each other for a number of pages. Now look at the rest of the board and it is a lot of people praising ED and the work that FD have done, far more people happy with the game then those complaining in this thread.

 

[Papa Smurf]

A wise man once wrote;

"But FD and David Braben said so. They apologised and admitted that they should have stated as much a while back.
True but the damage is already done and saying sorry really doesn’t help much.

It’s like running over your neighbour’s cat, then hiding the body in your shed for a month before deciding to come clean, tell them, and show them where the body is.

You may be sorry, but that’s not doing to make them feel any better or think of you in a better light and it’s certainly not going to bring their cat back to life.

Sometimes sorry isn’t really good enough is the point I was trying to make there, somewhat dramatically I admit . "

That's funny. About ~9000 posts ago people were saying, all we want them to do is say sorry.

So they say sorry. Then they said, all we want them to do is refund us. So now they're looking at refunds.

He's even gone as far as saying he'll review the decision (to throw offline out) after release, and you don't believe him.

Just saying. Is this the point where I run and duck?

 

[MikeyTT]

Roger. They got a long way to go... words are cheap, their credibility is in negative, odds are very high that they will not recover from this but they can still attempt to fix it and who know they mbe successful! (TIME WILL TELL)

Firstly I'm on your side of the offline fence, but I think you're misguided if you think that offline-gate will materially hurt FD in the future. Yes, there will be a portion of the customers who will remain unhappy and there will be a loss of sales due to this (my mate has said he's not interested in it now, so that's 1). Although the increased media coverage may bring many pro-online gamers to the ED world, so could be a counterbalance effect here.
.
All you have to do is look at the likes of EA. They constantly screw over their customers and deliver poor products at launch. Reams of people swear they'll never buy the next BF product, after the issues that took months to resolve and arguably still aren't, but customers will still buy the games. Yes a few drop off here and there, but they aren't in enough numbers to really matter.
.
It's unfortunately just a part of life. I hope that the continuation of this thread results in FD taking a serious look, post release, at the inclusion of offline in the future, I really do. I also hope that they include the community in this discussion.
.
Ultimately in a few weeks time, the focus will be on the launch, and I hope that's a success. The media focus will then switch to the positives of the online universe and the incredible living galaxy. At this stage offline will be a mere footnote in any reviews. To think any different is just wishful thinking I'm afraid.

 

[phlOgistOn]

A wise man once wrote;

"But FD and David Braben said so. They apologised and admitted that they should have stated as much a while back.
True but the damage is already done and saying sorry really doesn’t help much.

It’s like running over your neighbour’s cat, then hiding the body in your shed for a month before deciding to come clean, tell them, and show them where the body is.

You may be sorry, but that’s not doing to make them feel any better or think of you in a better light and it’s certainly not going to bring their cat back to life.

Sometimes sorry isn’t really good enough is the point I was trying to make there, somewhat dramatically I admit . "

Killing an animal...dropping a feature that would hold back development of the game proper

A few days - a month



Sounds like a completely fair analogy to me.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Yes you are right... 10,101 pages of people singing their praises and telling FD how great they are!

Ha ha, and the rest... Are we talking about another 10k+ thread or am I missing something.

 

[mbpoblet]

There is one funny thing about copy protection. There were developers who were so obssessed with copy protecting their products that their game failed. Just remember Silent hunter3Silent Hunter4 who forced players to be allways connected. And that ended very badly, cause many players who paid for the game were unble to play it properly.

On the other hand, you have projects like Witcher, whose developers do not care at all about protecting their product. And it was and is huge financial success. They even once hinted they wanted it to be pirated. so that even people who would never play that type of game try it. and many of these bought the game to support developer after they liked pirated version.

The bottom line is that copy protection can be counterproductive. Yes ,it is needed. But the moment the copy protection starts to interfere with normal gameplay, than it is nothing more than bullying loyal customers who paid for the game.

Quality of the game is a key to success. Overall copyprotection isn't.

I shared this video in a longer post about this matter, but I think it might be appropriate here too:

[video=youtube;0Qkyt1wXNlI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qkyt1wXNlI[/video]

 

[SuBSynk]

LOL its that many posts, not pages, good god the drama you make up. Most of those posts made by a small number of people. Heck for a while it was just 3 posters responding to each other for a number of pages. Now look at the rest of the board and it is a lot of people praising ED and the work that FD have done, far more people happy with the game then those complaining in this thread.

This ^^^ The thread got old and tiresome a long time ago.

Now its just that embarrassing moment when you realise you have kicked up a fuss and ostracized yourself from a community it is to be honest just awkward.

 

[Papa Smurf]

My mistake it is posts and pages (101 pages and 10,000 posts)

While we are at it - there is only group of people who created this drama and they are all working for FD. If you don't believe me ask yourself what started this? Papa Smurf or FD failing to do what they told everyone they will?

Cheers,

LOL its that many posts, not pages, good god the drama you make up. Most of those posts made by a small number of people. Heck for a while it was just 3 posters responding to each other for a number of pages. Now look at the rest of the board and it is a lot of people praising ED and the work that FD have done, far more people happy with the game then those complaining in this thread.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

A wise man once wrote;

"But FD and David Braben said so. They apologised and admitted that they should have stated as much a while back.
True but the damage is already done and saying sorry really doesn’t help much.

It’s like running over your neighbour’s cat, then hiding the body in your shed for a month before deciding to come clean, tell them, and show them where the body is.

You may be sorry, but that’s not doing to make them feel any better or think of you in a better light and it’s certainly not going to bring their cat back to life.

Sometimes sorry isn’t really good enough is the point I was trying to make there, somewhat dramatically I admit . "

With a teeny-weeny difference, I must add. It really is small. Running over someone's cat is illegal. The other... has been debated before so not repeating.

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

When will all the people moaning about no offline be gone? I'll come back when they're all out.

 

[SuBSynk]

With a teeny-weeny difference, I must add. It really is small. Running over someone's cat is illegal. The other... has been debated before so not repeating.

Not sure if running over a cat is illegal, not if you don't do it on purpose

Now hiding it your shed, that's maybe a different matter lol

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Not sure if running over a cat is illegal, not if you don't do it on purpose

Now hiding it your shed, that's maybe a different matter lol

Actually, I think it is something like failing to report that you've killed a domestic animal that's illegal. So yes, you are right, it's the shed thing.

 

[Meraco]

Not sure if running over a cat is illegal, not if you don't do it on purpose

Now hiding it your shed, that's maybe a different matter lol

So... Schrödinger's cat ??

 

[SuBSynk]

Actually, I think it is something like failing to report that you've killed a domestic animal that's illegal. So yes, you are right, it's the shed thing.

Yea keeping dead bodies in sheds is generally frowned upon i would assume