No Single Player offline Mode then?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Stop acting so selfish and generally over-reacting at something that to you is just a game. For some it's our livelihood. Frontier is not showing you the finger and acting out of spite. It's acting in its self-interest but also your interest.

So it's selfish for the people who now cannot play the game at all to complain after being told that what they were paying for will not be delivered? How's that in their interest? Believe it or not, not everyone is stinking rich. They can actually be upset when it turns out that they were utterly wasting their money but no-one bothered to tell them.
 
I'm not directly concerned as my connection is fairly stable, and I generally just lurk in these forums. But lets be clear the issue boils down, mostly, to 5 things :

1. Offline is necessary for some people whose internet access is low bandwidth, simply flaky, throttled or pay as you go ;
2. Solo Exploration may have been what some people wanted, and that type of gameplay will not be possible ;
3. The pledge tiers with "DRM free" editions seem moot in retrospect ;
4. Who's to say where FD will be in 10 years time, at least can still play Original Elite or Elite II ;
5. FDs kickstarter promises wont be kept...

An elegant gesture would have been to at least mention Kickstarter reimbursements. A technical solution is to ship the backend, in the same way some people manage their own private Minecraft servers. This would allow the above people to play the way they want. Last point, FD knows this less than a month away from shipping ? Really ?
 
Straw man reasoning. If the servers ever go down they will surely implement an offline patch no problem. But for now keeping everything updated across all these various modes sounds a huge drain of their limited resources. I'd rather have a great game now than worry whats gonna happen 10 years later. We're lucky they aren't charging subscription in fact for everything we're getting??! And it wont surprise me if they end up doing so...cant wait to see the 1st world whining then omfg. Im out./


Two reasons that this eventuality concerns me:

1) Frontier are a relatively small company. If the servers become financially unviable they will have to be shut down. I find this concerning in another way: I don't understand what will be providing the funding for them long after release. Will something else (e.g. microtransactions/pay to win) need to be added to the game in order to keep the servers going a couple of years down the road?

2) I'm a retro gamer. I spend more of my time playing games that are 10+ years old than I do on new titles. I like to pick up games I have fond memories of and play them again. Hell, I still go back to playing the Frontier/Elite games every so often. In ten or fifteen years time I'll still be able to play Elite, Frontier, and FFE, but Elite Dangerous in any form? Unlikely.

Quite honestly, as a Kickstarter backer I feel betrayed by this news. I still would have backed the game in the knowledge that it would be online only, but it would have been at a lower level; the boxed version is as useful as a paperweight now. As soon as it became apparent to them that the offline mode was problematic, Frontier should have informed the backers unambiguously, with humility, contrition, and ideally with the option of a refund for those who wanted it. They didn't, they slipped it out with no apology, in a newsletter a month before the final release. Even then it required clarification here. I'm sorry but I find the way that Frontier has handled this to be ethically questionable at the very least.
 
But if I imagine to get a totally internet free game which fully procedually creating its content I also would expect the trades routes to get changed by the game itself... as it would be in a "real" developing Galaxy or system.
A totally static universe would get boring to me soon...

But frankly, the way it is in beta 3, its pretty much impossible to see it much more than an rng. which would do the job offline too.
 
Thats the thing tho, nothing will happen as regards to the cutting of a single player offline mode, when backing the game every person effectively becomes an investor (much like dragons den for a popular tv reference) and not a consumer, the final product did not exist and folks were merely backing the plan for a final product, single player offline mode has been deemed an un-achievable goal by the team working on the plan, as an investor your choices are to either A) shut up and put up or B) withdraw your support and ask for a refund, there is no option C for silly stuff like law suits etc. (the term investor is used very very loosely)

That's not entirely correct. It is not an "investment" ( I acknowledge you use the term loosely), that would be an entirely different thing with different rules. Despite what KS may say in it's T&Cs, in my experience, Govt regulators would classify this whole thing as I noted earlier... An online transaction for the purchase of digital or physical (in the case of the boxed sets) goods.

But, as I said earlier, it's way too early for anything like that to even be a consideration as there is still too much happening.
 
I really empathize with the folks who feel they were betrayed. I do. I've been there. However, I don't think it's too much to ask that people act like adults, ask for refunds where feasible and move on with their lives.

Something folks need to realize is this; ED is a product that FD is producing. Backers invested and were promised a list of things based on the level of backing they elected. What the final version of the game itself, FD's product, looks like is up to the development team and that product does not belong to the backers in any way.

Here's what I mean. If you backed at the £25 level you were promised: "Download a single copy of the game and also gain 500 credits when starting a new game. Plus all of the rewards listed above, except the limited £20 reward. Higher rewards gain the 500 credit bonus, but this only applies if the default starting option is selected."

What the final version of the game would look like is not specified anywhere in the list of rewards for any level of backing. The list of rewards is what a lawyer will tell you was promised to you for your financial investment.

I'm not sure of the law in other countries (I'm in the U.S.), but I understand lawyers fairly well and they'll look at what the backers were promised. The planned goals of the project do not constitute a promise. Plaintiffs would no doubt argue that the only reason/primary reason they backed was because of the offline version being part of the original plan, but in the end that's not what was promised.

I once invested in a company because of a product they planned to release. That product never made it to market. I was disappointed, but I was never promised that product. This situation is legally identical.

This horse has been beaten to death, but for the sake of flogging it one last time. Kickstarter rewards are now legally binding. One of them was, and is, a DRM free copy of the game. A forced online connection and a permanent tether to FDEV servers is always on DRM, therefore a conflict in the reward tiers has been created and FDEV can no longer fulfil rewards above a certain funding level. Please, search the thread before repeating the same falsehoods, I know the old adage "If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes true" but this time it's not going to be the case.
 
My biggest grip with all this is the fact that Solo (online) means that regions that get explored will show up in my Solo game. The purpose for Solo/Single player is to enjoy the universe on my own especially being a explore type of player I don't like the idea that someone else who isn't in my Solo play can impact it because it's tied in to the multiplayer universe. I think that needs to be taken into consideration I can overlook the offline aspect if they can keep the universe separate between Solo and Multi.

Only if you buy the flipping market data. The game has all 400 billion star systems accessible with varying levels of details. THAT IS WHAT THE ONLINE PORTION BRINGS.
 
This is a bit disappointment ! I did Kickstart this game and at the time offline mode was one of the selling points for me... at least add it later date or release a lite server I can run at home.
 
Straw man reasoning. If the servers ever go down they will surely implement an offline patch no problem. But for now keeping everything updated across all these various modes sounds a huge drain of their limited resources. I'd rather have a great game now than worry whats gonna happen 10 years later. We're lucky they aren't charging subscription in fact for everything we're getting??! And it wont surprise me if they end up doing so...cant wait to see the 1st world whining then omfg. Im out./

So they can't produce an offline mode now because it's technically difficult and would require resources, but if, for example, they were going bust, they'd suddenly be able to magic a patch into existence? That's total nonsense; if they can't do it now then there's no way they'll do it if the servers cease being financially viable. The best we could hope for is that the server software would be released to keep private games going.
 
This horse has been beaten to death, but for the sake of flogging it one last time. Kickstarter rewards are now legally binding. One of them was, and is, a DRM free copy of the game. A forced online connection and a permanent tether to FDEV servers is always on DRM, therefore a conflict in the reward tiers has been created and FDEV can no longer fulfil rewards above a certain funding level. Please, search the thread before repeating the same falsehoods, I know the old adage "If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes true" but this time it's not going to be the case.

Thanks for the response. :)

I did search, but didn't see it come up in the results (which were copious given the thread is rapidly approaching 500 pages). I did not intend to "repeat a lie," only try to contribute an observation.

Hopefully any legal action pursued by those who need the offline version will not kill FD or ED. The majority of players would be denied a good game.

I'm out. This thread is on a collision course with crazy town and I want to watch from the sidelines. :p
 
I agree.

However at this stage the refund has not been offered, so all legal obligations have yet to be met.

If this is about preorders then you have an argument.

If you mean the kickstarter, then no.

What you have in fact done is given some money to a tailor who told you he wants to set up a shop selling both grey and brown suits. As a thank you he will provide you with a brown and grey suit when the store open, but you are free to come in and try the grey suits up until they do.

Then a couple of weeks before the shop opens he tells you that due to various logistical reasons he can no longer make the brown suit he was hoping for, but is still making the grey suits, which are superior in everyway and have many more buttons (more buttons that they originally thought) and he'll throw in a waistcoat for all the time you've spent going to his shop and getting measured for the suits before release.

You get all annoyed.

He says, "i had every intention of providing brown suits, but it just isn't possible. It's a shame. I'd love to give you a brown suit, but unfortunately that material just isn't right for the type he suits he wants to make.

I've just been contacted by Amnesty for torturing this analogy too much. But you get the general idea.
 
That's not entirely correct. It is not an "investment" ( I acknowledge you use the term loosely), that would be an entirely different thing with different rules. Despite what KS may say in it's T&Cs, in my experience, Govt regulators would classify this whole thing as I noted earlier... An online transaction for the purchase of digital or physical (in the case of the boxed sets) goods.

But, as I said earlier, it's way too early for anything like that to even be a consideration as there is still too much happening.

It wasn't a purchase of digital/physical goods tho, therein lies the grey area many folks are missing. When people pledged to pay on kickstarter there was no actual game, some pictures and a fella chatting about it but no actual item.. digital or otherwise, hence why traditional consumer laws won't apply and why i used the term investor to reflect what you are more accurately (although not in a lawful sense).
 
Thankgod i didn't buy the game , 1st because i didnt get a physical copy wich is a must or else i won't buy it.
2nd because i don't like MMO's and wanted to buy an offline game only.
3th because i already had my doubts from the start and expected he would lie his way through the development of the game ending with an MMO only game. (guess i was right about my gutfeelings)
i'll give my money to the makers of OoLite now instead , too bad i wasted 1500 bucks for a new i7 hasswell system , thankgod i didn't bought the 4k monitors yet and the rest of the hardware for elite i had planned.
 
-"Can I get an apple for my money?"
-"Sure"
-"Ok, here is my money"
-"And here is your orange"
-"Wait, orange??? You told me I would get an apple!"
-"But an orange is so much better for you!"

Yeah, really swell...

I would guess that to develop a computer game is being a bit more complex than buying some fruit.
I always felt that ED has worked very professionally .. I am working now for more than 20 years in software development (also in game development business as developer)

Therefore I often saw requirements had to be changed or refused because either the customer wants something different or the developers had to recognize that the requirement is not able to get technically fulfiled or the development of the requirement got uneconomical.

That means no one knows everything in advance especially in complex scenarios.... and the development of ED is a complex scenario.

So that means one "important" requirement "for some backers" is missing... but almost all others are getting fulfiled in time.
This I would call outstanding!
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to pass though there to give my support to all who lost the possibility to play Elite Dangerous.
I was at the very early start of this thread and i am "only" semi impacted by the offline.
(i can play on week end but on regular work evening, when i can take some rest, i am often outside in countries with a very bad network)

For me we will loose a part of our community, a part of our Elite heart and i feel sad for that even with my 51 years old.
Its not a child position, its a sincere one.
Some of you are as old i am (and some more) and i know how its hard to lost a dream like that.

Some people have being very rude in both side, that was not good as this thread is read by both part : Ed team and reviewers.
It confort people to stay in their line and i am sure it was not intented at the very start of the thread.

I hope that in the near future there will be a way to resolve this, but for the moment it look that there is no way.
Its very hard, it make me feel sad and i really hope all this emotion and all theses posts will serve for something good.

You are and even if you quit us, a part of our community and in this game there is also a part of you.
Thanks for that.
/cheer
 
Last edited:
For some it's our livelihood.
Apparently here is a Frontier employee who registered just to post in this thread.

the money invested needs to be recuperated and that's why offline is being scrapped
Interesting. So.... exactly how does FD expect to increase its profits which an offline "once a month update" or something wouldn't have achieved? I thought I had already paid my price for entry, but apparently not.

spoiling it for the vast majority of people who support Frontier?
I happily support Frontier. But as its standard-bearer, not its pall-bearer.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom