No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
He does have a point though that 'statements' in kick starter faqs don't mean much once development starts and progresses past a certain point especially when stakeholders are pressurising for a release in 2014. It's the risk of rewarding the KS and the belief it will deliver vs the realities of software development.
There are some hard lessons here for both sides.
I see, aslong as i get NO drop outs im not bothered. If i do experience dropouts then Frontier will need to fix it, make the game offline or issue refund. The game will die if there are problems with droputs, people just will not bother, the game will get bad reviews and will simply die. Then the online servers will be turned off, a patch will be sent out and thegame will then be officially offline but there will be no community and the game would have died a premature death.
It was rocksolidly promised by the man himself.
Sorry - what?
You'll have to do more than a screen shot with a circle around a date to explain that one to me...
Ah you changed the picture....
Nevermind - have seen that picture before.
With an online games, it aint a matter of *if* but when.
Lugalbandak
Banned
It was rocksolidly promised by the man himself.
Must play videogames on may way to work otherwise this is a bad workday (i hope he takes public transit)
At the time of the assertions by FD I stood up for the offline people - FD gave back assurances / promises / changed the KS FAQ / Mentioned it in the Reddit AMA / Magazines have quoted DB as saying an offline version would be available - and now it's not.
"Ask for a refund" was the attitude .. so I have. On the assumption that I am not banned I will let you know the outcome - original KS backer & namer of the Founder System.
Angry, upset & disillusioned by FD .. and things were going so well last week
Loyalty is not a one way street.
For those unaware, Liqua was that exclusive KS backer who supported FD to this level...
One of the problems FD are also facing with these refund requests is establishing precedence. If they return refunds for this, then they may be obliged to refund other unrelated requests where promised content is not delivered.
Financial accountability is a beautiful thing.
So now we have a situation where the risk management decision to pull offline mode has failed to silently slip by. No doubt next week, FD will be weighing up whether the current and future brand damage is worth digging their heels in.
I see 3 possibilities.
1. FD announce the offline version will be available post-release, and before any expansions.
I feel this is the best solution overall. FD come out as a software firm who listen and act on customer expectations, and customers will reflect this. Coming just before the launch, they can use this issue in their favour. Refunds over content promises remains untested, and perhaps uneeded.
2. FD retain their damage control, and provide full refunds.
Establishes the refund precedence, and banishes partial loyal user base. Partial brand damage.
3. FD retain their damage control, and provide partial or no refunds.
Mitigates any precedence, and reinforces full authority over project. This is countered by negative media reports which will damage the official launch and subsequent sales.
The coming days will reveal what path they take.
Yes but in my experience the solo play is very solid and I can't remember it ever dropping out. I can't say the same for the current beta open play mode although it has been much much much better over the last week. Which is promising.... (oh oh I used 'that' word...
)
A year ago, things change and yes it's sad and some people are upset, I understand that. So, ask for refund and move on.
But no, now we have waves of posts of tin-foil hatted conspiracy to defraud people and others attempting to take physical action against FD staff at the release party. Really?
+1 to this
Bit of empathy would be nice though.
Last edited by a moderator:
The thing is you will ALWAYS get some dropouts or freezes. Such is the nature of ONLINE play. And that's the reason I would not support this game knowing it would be online only.
Loyalty is not a one way street.
For those unaware, Liqua was that exclusive KS backer who supported FD to this level...
One of the problems FD are also facing with these refund requests is establishing precedence. If they return refunds for this, then they may be obliged to refund other unrelated requests where promised content is not delivered.
Financial accountability is a beautiful thing.
So now we have a situation where the risk management decision to pull offline mode has failed to silently slip by. No doubt next week, FD will be weighing up whether the current and future brand damage is worth digging their heels in.
I see 3 possibilities.
1. FD announce the offline version will be available post-release, and before any expansions.
I feel this is the best solution overall. FD come out as a software firm who listen and act on customer expectations, and customers will reflect this. Coming just before the launch, they can use this issue in their favour. Refunds over content promises remains untested, and perhaps uneeded.
2. FD retain their damage control, and provide full refunds.
Establishes the refund precedence, and banishes partial loyal user base. Partial brand damage.
3. FD retain their damage control, and provide partial or no refunds.
Mitigates any precedence, and reinforces full authority over project. This is countered by negative media reports which will damage the official launch and subsequent sales.
The coming days will reveal what path they take.
+1 rep .. best comment since a long time .. mature and professional.
Loyalty is not a one way street.
For those unaware, Liqua was that exclusive KS backer who supported FD to this level...
One of the problems FD are also facing with these refund requests is establishing precedence. If they return refunds for this, then they may be obliged to refund other unrelated requests where promised content is not delivered.
Financial accountability is a beautiful thing.
So now we have a situation where the risk management decision to pull offline mode has failed to silently slip by. No doubt next week, FD will be weighing up whether the current and future brand damage is worth digging their heels in.
I see 3 possibilities.
1. FD announce the offline version will be available post-release, and before any expansions.
I feel this is the best solution overall. FD come out as a software firm who listen and act on customer expectations, and customers will reflect this. Coming just before the launch, they can use this issue in their favour. Refunds over content promises remains untested, and perhaps uneeded.
2. FD retain their damage control, and provide full refunds.
Establishes the refund precedence, and banishes partial loyal user base. Partial brand damage.
3. FD retain their damage control, and provide partial or no refunds.
Mitigates any precedence, and reinforces full authority over project. This is countered by negative media reports which will damage the official launch and subsequent sales.
The coming days will reveal what path they take.
Without taking anything away from the backer or the amount - backing is inherently risky. There is no guarantee of even a product.
A product has been delivered that is different to what the backer wanted.
I don't know how a refund will work in this case as he wouldn't have got one if nothing had been delivered and he knew that.
Loyalty is not a one way street.
For those unaware, Liqua was that exclusive KS backer who supported FD to this level...
One of the problems FD are also facing with these refund requests is establishing precedence. If they return refunds for this, then they may be obliged to refund other unrelated requests where promised content is not delivered.
Financial accountability is a beautiful thing.
So now we have a situation where the risk management decision to pull offline mode has failed to silently slip by. No doubt next week, FD will be weighing up whether the current and future brand damage is worth digging their heels in.
I see 3 possibilities.
1. FD announce the offline version will be available post-release, and before any expansions.
I feel this is the best solution overall. FD come out as a software firm who listen and act on customer expectations, and customers will reflect this. Coming just before the launch, they can use this issue in their favour. Refunds over content promises remains untested, and perhaps uneeded.
2. FD retain their damage control, and provide full refunds.
Establishes the refund precedence, and banishes partial loyal user base. Partial brand damage.
3. FD retain their damage control, and provide partial or no refunds.
Mitigates any precedence, and reinforces full authority over project. This is countered by negative media reports which will damage the official launch and subsequent sales.
The coming days will reveal what path they take.
Now if that story gets picked up by the press, FD will see the launch slip though their fingers in more ways than people not being able to connect on release-day.
I'm sure that if it was not offline but the restricting of multiplayer to a max of 2 pc per island you'd be happy to go with a silent refund?
For some the offline feature is/was such an imortant promoted advertised feature that lead to their decision to buy at whatever level
Woah, I didn't see the threats of physical action against FD staff post but that is just insane.
The "lets boo FD" post at the premier was in bad enough taste but to threat a physical response, what is wrong with some people.
Maybe they will need security at the event! I offer my services for free. <--jk
Last edited:
It was a jape about heckling them. Someone took it a step further and joked about getting physical, a joke no more.
Yes and such a healthy thread it is as well. Really shows some quality and what a nice community we really have here.
I get that people are annoyed and angry. I don't get the comments about fraud and deliberate conspiracy.
There is a refund process if you don't like the direction the product has taken. Nothing you say or do here will bring back offline. The decision has been made and that is the way the product has been developed now.
I'm sure it will all eventually calm down.
I think everyone on both sides of this torrid commentary is getting far too upset.
Indeed, I think that guven what we are talking about is a game, albeit a much loved and anticipated one, I think a decent step away from the keyboard, a deep breath and a nice cup of jasmine tea might be in order.
I am in the camp of 'bought it because it was an online version of the game and I wanted to share ny experiences'.
I have also met a few of the senior team involved and can confirm that they are lovely people. Genuine, well meaning, hard working, lovely people.
It is worth remembering that whether your views are right or wrong, there are real human beings at the end of the screen reading your comments.
The written word is read without the aid of verbal intonation, visual facial clues or the knowledge that you can judge the reaction to how you are delivering your point.
So. Many of us don't mind, some of us are a little put out, a few of us are angry.
Negativity will do nothing other than destroy all the hard work, spoiling it for everyone.
Express your disappointment, but temper it with realism and an approach to solving the problem or being part of the solution.
If you want to say you are 'out' permanently, leave quietly and with grace, asking politely for your money back.
If you want to encourage them to come up with a viable solution, do so with good humour.
If you don't mind, do so quietly so as not to upset people.
Consider that they may have made a mistake, consider how the human beings at the end of this thread feel. This isn't a 50, 200 or 10000 pound investment, this is their baby, their daily bread and their hard effort.
Happy we have a great game coming out, wishing no one had ever promised offline, sad at the vitriolic response to what appears to be a painful mistake.
Indeed, I think that guven what we are talking about is a game, albeit a much loved and anticipated one, I think a decent step away from the keyboard, a deep breath and a nice cup of jasmine tea might be in order.
I am in the camp of 'bought it because it was an online version of the game and I wanted to share ny experiences'.
I have also met a few of the senior team involved and can confirm that they are lovely people. Genuine, well meaning, hard working, lovely people.
It is worth remembering that whether your views are right or wrong, there are real human beings at the end of the screen reading your comments.
The written word is read without the aid of verbal intonation, visual facial clues or the knowledge that you can judge the reaction to how you are delivering your point.
So. Many of us don't mind, some of us are a little put out, a few of us are angry.
Negativity will do nothing other than destroy all the hard work, spoiling it for everyone.
Express your disappointment, but temper it with realism and an approach to solving the problem or being part of the solution.
If you want to say you are 'out' permanently, leave quietly and with grace, asking politely for your money back.
If you want to encourage them to come up with a viable solution, do so with good humour.
If you don't mind, do so quietly so as not to upset people.
Consider that they may have made a mistake, consider how the human beings at the end of this thread feel. This isn't a 50, 200 or 10000 pound investment, this is their baby, their daily bread and their hard effort.
Happy we have a great game coming out, wishing no one had ever promised offline, sad at the vitriolic response to what appears to be a painful mistake.
Last edited:
- Status