No Single Player offline Mode then?

[jamotide]

You expected a refund on Sunday?
Really?

No, not really. We expected them to say that everyone who ordered a DRM free version will soon be refunded. Not this case by case crap.

 

[ecgallagher]

Yep, and so would others if it was promised that it would happen (with set dates). The reason why I, personally, want an offline version is to ensure the longevity of the game (and to also play it when I'm not connected to the internet )

Well I truly hope they find a way to make this happen.

 

[Stormprooter]

Yep, and so would others if it was promised that it would happen (with set dates). The reason why I, personally, want an offline version is to ensure the longevity of the game (and to also play it when I'm not connected to the internet )

Yes, same here, I'd be happy to wait a further 12 months for an offline version, no problem. Happy to play online (when I can) until then, and would still play online when possible even with an offline version. But would really like to have an offline version for when I cannot be online.

 

[mbabbs]

So far the share price is completely unaffected by the news. Having said that they haven't released an RNS.

 

[JeffRyan]

Can I suggest we refrain from conjecture for an hour or two as we give FD a chance to respond? It's Monday! Let's see what it brings!

 

[SuBSynk]

KS TS clearly say, that if the pledge rewards aren't delivered, the creator is legally bound to refund.

No it does not, it states

"they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers."

"they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form."

 

[jabokai]

I'm glad we agree on the nature of GG.

I didn't meant the subject. I understand that some people are upset at an important-to-them feature being dropped, and the nature of how it was reported.

What is remenicient of GG is the mob justice and pressure group action. "Since we're not getting what we want, we'll punish Frontier, put commercial pressure on them by making sure they get as much bad press as possible".

That to me is absolutely despicable and disgusting behavior, and exactly like the GG .

All they have to do to avoid this is offer full refunds and apologise - nobody can really complain then as they'll have suffered no loss.

According to many here it's only a vocal few affected so surely such refunds, while not perfect for FD, will be easily manageable.

This way they satisfy the terms of the Kickstarter too (bolded relevant parts) -

What is a creator obligated to do once their project is funded?

When a project is successfully funded, the creator is responsible for completing the project and fulfilling each reward. Their fundamental obligation to backers is to finish all the work that was promised. Once a creator has done so, they’ve fulfilled their obligation to their backers. At the same time, backers must understand that Kickstarter is not a store. When you back a project, you’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. There’s a chance something could happen that prevents the creator from being able to finish the project as promised. If a creator is absolutely unable to complete the project and fulfill rewards, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to a satisfying conclusion for their backers.

 

[Titus Balls]

I'm definitely not saying that this should happen (in fact I hope Frontier can rectify and get out of the hole they're digging for themselves), but I'm certain that, due to the way they have handled and are still handling this whole situation the probability of it happening has definitely increased, and will probably keep increasing in the near future (although it will probably be nothing compared to the result of the predictable reaction to the eventual publication of gamma and release feature sets, which will probably still be small compared to the result of the also predictable server crash on release, even if Elite: Dangerous is not on SimCity's scale by at least one order of magnitude).

And I'm definitely not happy about it, but Frontier seem intent on achieving that result (one almost wonders whether the game will be renamed to make reference to springtime and a certain austrian-born dictator, come the premiere event...).

Both Titus's and Godwin's law have now happened in this thread.

 

[CmdrPSB]

Here's how refunds should really work:

Player has never logged into game/pre-order without beta access - fair enough, you can't play online, you get a refund.
Player has somehow played game despite claiming no internet connection - no refund.
Player has played game for 300 hours and claims unable to play game - lol no.

 

[Hermit]

Well I truly hope they find a way to make this happen.

I do too. You shoudn't get me wrong when I argue for Offline. I do want what's best for the game and an offline version will do it the world of good. I was even hoping they'd separate it and sell the offline version on places like GOG. Yes, it would get hacked and pirated, but even that would promote the game further (I posted a link to Braben's comments on the benefits of software piracy earlier in the thread). It would ensure the longevity of Elite Dangerous, whilst promoting the online game as well.

 

[Clencher]

Just a few more pages and ... we may have the complete works of Shakespeare in here. Once confirmed it is imperative that the typewriters are taken from the monkeys in case they start to think for themselves.

 

[the darkwalker]

No it does not, it states

"they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers."

"they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form."

wich, in this case, basing my assumptions on the last "official" newsletter, are pretty scarse...considering half the stuff promised at release won't make it and we still do not know for certain what we will receive on release date (if other stuff does not get insta-cut again) but i'm only assuming only time will tell at this point the ball i's in the hands of fd now, and it stinks a lot

 

[jamotide]

No it does not

Yeah:

Is a creator legally obligated to fulfill the promises of their project?

Yes. Kickstarter's Terms of Use require creators to fulfill all rewards of their project or refund any backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill.

https://www.kickstarter.com/blog/accountability-on-kickstarter

 

[Dr Zachary Smith]

yes i considered that and frankly if you go to sea why is that FD's fault..You decided to go to sea, get a grip.

How about if i decide to live in a cave?...Oh that's right i should blame FD for no access to the internet!...or maybe just maybe i should consider the fact that going to live in a cave might affect my gaming...

Irrelevant, fully offline was a thing, so he's paid under the impression he can go to sea and still play. In fact if FD stood by what they said they would deliver, we could all actually play ED in a cave..as long as there was electricity in your cave and a pc of course

 

[Erna Jedermann]

Here's how refunds should really work:

Player has never logged into game/pre-order without beta access - fair enough, you can't play online, you get a refund.
Player has somehow played game despite claiming no internet connection - no refund.
Player has played game for 300 hours and claims unable to play game - lol no.

What is with the player to give Online a try, don´t be happywith it, and waiting for an "promised/Expected" Offline Version and get this info in a not good way <snip>
(NO I am not talking about me.......)

But I have something in Common with FD now...I wrote some not so good things, and now I am on MANY Ignore Lists, and even if I say/do Something nice..nobody will here me... ...FD learn from that....

 

[the darkwalker]

Here's how refunds should really work:

Player has never logged into game/pre-order without beta access - fair enough, you can't play online, you get a refund.
Player has somehow played game despite claiming no internet connection - no refund.
Player has played game for 300 hours and claims unable to play game - lol no.

real world is quite different. http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/shopping/shopping-abroad/guarantees/index_en.htm

 

[Rainchild]

Here's a plausible scenario that affects everybody:

In two years time, Microsoft makes an offer to David that he can't refuse. He was thinking about retirement anyway, and it was the right time to make "RollerCoastImals 4: Elite Minecraft Edition".
So they buy the studio, all the games that come along with it, and nothing happens for a bit. They start making their new game and reassign the bulk of the team, leaving two devs in maintenance mode.
One of those devs decides it's time to form an indie studio, be his own boss because he doesn't really like the new leadership appointed by Microsoft.
Six months later, they look at the income vs expenses sheet, they see that Elite is in the bargain bin and making meagre sales because Star Citizen has just come out and everyone's on that at the moment, but it's still costing $100,000 per month in Amazon hosting fees.
So they put up an announcement saying 'due to lack of income and expensive hosting, we will be turning off the Elite servers in 3 months time'.

While we all hope that Elite Dangerous will be as wildly successful as World of Warcraft, and the servers will still be running strong in 2025 (with 10 hour queues to play the "Andromeda Galaxy" expansion!), the reality is not many games are that successful. Game servers get taken down all the time and sadly, that will mean we (all of us, even you online-only champions) will no longer be able to play. Again. Ever. Even though it was promised that we would be able to.

 

[Nomadski]

Here's how refunds should really work:

Player has never logged into game/pre-order without beta access - fair enough, you can't play online, you get a refund.
Player has somehow played game despite claiming no internet connection - no refund.
Player has played game for 300 hours and claims unable to play game - lol no.

What about someone who has played 150 hours in Beta, knowing come January he wont have any internet for a very long period of time, but its okay because it was confirmed multiple times by the highest members of FD that offline would be included, so it wouldn't affect them if the game got released for Christmas, and they could pay around £250 to support the game being made because of this?

 

[ecgallagher]

What is with the player to give Online a try, don´t be happywith it, and waiting for an "promised/Expected" Offline Version and get this info in a not good way, and be P.$%&$§ about it...
(NO I am not talking about me.......)

But I have something in Common with FD now...I wrote some not so good things, and now I am on MANY Ignore Lists, and even if I say/do Something nice..nobody will here me... ...FD learn from that....

I haven't ignored you and have no plan to do so.
Peace Out!

 

[kwh]

I really don't get the anger here, I understand the disappointment, but not the fury, the malicious comments and the threats.

People are acting like Frontier DELIBERATELY mislead them to steal their money, Frontier wanted to provide a fully offline option, they said so from the start, and I'm sure that they looked into every conceivable way of making it viable, time spent I may add which in the run up to launch was very developmentally precious.

I fully imagine Frontier are equally disappointed that they where unable to find a solution and despite knowing that there would be a backlash, opted to inform the community now, prior to launch.

The last few weeks leading up to the launch of a game is a very delicate time PR wise, Frontier know this and yet still choose to divulge this bombshell knowing it was likely going to impact on their sales.
I for one applaud that honesty!

The behaviour of some people in this thread is shocking, the abuse, vitrio and use of threats are an embarrassment to this communities usual adult behaviour.

I've mentioned this in another thread, but I'd like to point it out here, people have accused Frontier of not caring and of deceit, yet look at Mr Michael Brookes's comments history page: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/search.php?searchid=283379
..you will see nearly three pages of comments, all posted on a Saturday I may add, all devoted to calmly explaining how this unfortunate conclusion was arrived at and why, in many cases his comments where met with abuse, yet despite this he continued to devoted his day off to being open and honest with us all.
That to me is not the behaviour of a company who does not care or one who's goal was one of deceit.

'The unfortunate conclusion' as you call it was not arrived at on Friday morning, was it. Nor even two weeks before that. Are you saying that in the intervening weeks or months between decision and casual announcement that a major feature would be dropped, Frontier just inadvertently forgot to mention it? Or failed to realise that anybody would even care? They were still selling the offline mode upuntil Friday!

Those of us who do a bit of software development for a living also think the stated reasons are... umm... credibility deficient. My feeling is it's totally doable, just not with the resources that Frontier have allocated on the release schedule they committed themselves to. Those two parameters are entirely under their control. They could easily have said "This is going to take longer than we realised, so we are going to slip the v1.0 release date, but please buy your kids access to the Gamma test for Christmas instead', rather than trying to sell a three quarters finished feature-incomplete version of ED 1.0 to the Christmas market... it required a conscious decision not to do that. 'We're not going to get all the promised features in in time for Christmas, boss, you can a) hire more devs, b) slip the release date or c) bin a major feature. Press A, B or C".

Even those who feel they are completely unaffected by the loss of an offline play option and would never have used it even if all the online servers vanished overnight must be concerned at the breaches of trust that what has happened demonstrate...