I gave an assumption, I have been corrected by another Cmdr, you may or may not be able to get a refund, best try and find out.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Yes this sounds reasonable.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
I gave an assumption, I have been corrected by another Cmdr, you may or may not be able to get a refund, best try and find out.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Yes this sounds reasonable.
I hope you're right! It may also be the "kids" get the officials to arrest the mother for child abuse, if they do it right...
Honestly, I don't see anything good coming from these arrogant statements. The more people get upset enough to go for a refund, the harder it hits FD and limits investments in future development. And THAT is in nobody's interest!
Well, they could have made the announcement a complex ARG that took weeks to untangle. So let's just say that is was the second worst possible way.
People are perfectly within their rights to vent their anger at the decision and forums are great for that, its just there has been a fairly large number suggesting things like fraud or false advertising etc. This is simply not the case and that is why this thread is probably 100 times bigger than it needed to be. The offline single player was part of the initial plan for the game, however a plan does not equal a final specification, for whatever reason its been decided right now that it cannot be achieved, no wrong doing at all. If you purchased the game based on that then im sorry that was a risk you willingly decided to take and is not FD's fault, the refund option is open to all those who wish to use it.
Last edited:
But for those that purchased the game for offline, there was no game testing done for offline at all.
We were not informed that offline game testing was never part of the upgrade, but it was a reasonable expectation that it would be.
Just as the offline will not be delivered in the final, it was/will not be delivered in the testing phase.
Fact that some were willing to test it in a SOLO/OPEN online mode demonstrated they were willing to assist FD make the game better in an overall sense. It does not demonstrate that they got any online benefit out of it whatsoever. As for myself, in all my many hours of testing, I never interacted with another player. Because there was no offline test module, I probably spent 95% of my time in SOLO online, and when I did venture into OPEN, I had no interest in interacting with other player ships, nor did I notice anything 'dynamically online' about the game at all (which was understandable because it was a test module, and I was not seeking any MP interaction).
"not FD's fault" - indeed we backers are very wicked for putting them in this situation.
I hope they don't think we wanted to do this to them.
We really didn't want to and it was a difficult decision, which we though long and hard about before we finally had to go this way.
(The backing of their game just wouldn't have been as rich without this decision, and we have to stick to our vision.)
But, all things considered, I don't think we should apologise to them.
Visa's representment system is available to the merchant, in response to a chargeback the merchant deems unjustified.
Please, people, don't regard the credit card chargeback mechanism as some kind of refund-by-proxy service, where you only need to talk to your card vendor's customer contact team, in lieu of direct dialogue with the merchant. That's not its purpose at all.
I bought the game a few weeks ago after reading on their web store in plain English that I would be able to play the game offline.
And you tell me it's my fault. . . this illustrates my previous post precisely.
You are making this worse for everyone.
I placed my order a week ago. At that stage, the offline version was still promised, and I placed a pre-order on that basis. And I have now placed a refund request on the grounds that the specifications and requirements of the game are different now to when I placed my pre-order.
I'm also not sure where you draw the line. If a basic function is promised and then reneged on, then that's fundamentally changing the product from the point at which you are taking money to the point at which the game is released. I'm not sure it's FD's choice to make at this point. It's essentially like dropping a platform. People backed or ordered the game on the promise that they could play the game on their PCs if they wanted to. Now we are told that the game will not be playable on a standalone PC. Not only that, but this game-changing news becomes the buried lead in a rambling newsletter on a dozen other topics, and couched in terms that try to make it sound like we should welcome this tough but ultimately for the best decision.
I purchased the game within the last few weeks too (before the newsletter etc), i read the descriptions and no mention of an offline single player was there. Again tho it is technically your fault, the game is not an official release yet and all features big and small are subject to change and if something is changed that you wanted then go through the refund system, thats what its there for.
The line has been drawn for years, anything that is said before a final game specification is not officially in the game but merely being worked on and hoped for, i mean if you need examples of things being "promised" and then removed then just look at google, things like resolution changes, fps changes , price changes and so on, its not new and as consumers we should understand that until its released nothing is set in stone.
Last edited:
Of course it's not its purpose.. but I've seen it before with other games, particularly those released under EA's banner, and yes the merchant does have the right to representment however then the issuer is allowed to ask for arbitration and so on and so forth.. it's a messy game. And that was my entire point of bringing it up.. that people SHOULD go through FD and FD SHOULD be considerate of the big picture.
I'm sure FD have already been talking with their legal advisers on how to deal with this and many other issues that have come out of this.
No.
I ordered the game from the online store. The game with an offline mode as per advertised. I have never played that game, or downloaded it. I have (instead) downloaded test scenarios, and tested them for free. What I originally ordered is not going to be available. The boxed DRM-free game with T-shirt is not going to be available. A boxed DRM-enabled (always online) game with a poxy polo shirt will be available. I may be seeking a full or partial refund. A reasonably substantial amount.
Note: This is not because I'm a 'troll' or a 'noob'. Brand new forumites should perhaps refrain from giving long-term backers hassle.
Last edited:
Where do you draw that line? Can they remove support for flight sticks, or the reverse of that, make them mandatory? There's no mention of that on the store page, so is that okay for them to change?
I bought a game that I was intending to run on my PC. I did my research and everywhere, including these forums and the other places Frontier have control over all said that same thing. Even now, you have to dig a bit to find out that this feature has been dropped, because FD have done such a poor job of announcing it. For a time, even this thread was made hard to find.
He's the victim of false Kickstarter advertising, and it's technically his fault?
This thread has gone beyond ridiculous.
Yes, I would love to be the fly on the wall during the mod/admin meetings in regards to this thread.
I'm sure its as heated in those channels, as it is here
You mean like Neverwinter Nights? Released June 18th, 2002, with a complete SDK toolset editor, including a full scripting language. Playable as single player offline, LAN multi-player (with pausing and saves or not), on the Internet with up to 100 concurrent players per world.
Still playable/moddable today, still a massive active community. Players have created more content for NWN than the developers ever could. The official campaign is a pittance compared to the persistent online worlds that were run for years. Entire new/custom systems/mechanics were added into the game long after the developers moved on to other titles and expansions.
And if you don't think 100 concurrent players counts as "massive", consider that E|D can't even do 32 per instance, at the moment, and yet they're still calling it "massive".
Bioware did it 12 years ago, Frontier can do it now.
You purchased the game for offline yes I agree, but the Beta was only ever available online. If offline was all you were ever interested in, then you should have told FD that you only wanted to test the offline Beta as soon as you found out that offline wasn't part of the Beta testing. At that point I think you would have been entitled to a refund for the Beta too. But you didn't do that. You continued to play/test the online Beta until you found out that you weren't going to get an offline game at the end, then you wanted a refund for both the Beta testing (which you'd already had access to), as well as the final game.
If you had no interest in playing/testing the online Beta, then presumably you wouldn't have accessed the online Beta until an offline version was ready to test.
Whether you were helping FD test the online Beta isn't relevant I think. Everyone who had access to Alpha, Premium Beta, or Beta payed to help, otherwise we'd be professional testers, and would be spending most of our time trying to systematically repeat scenarios that replicate bugs, in the interests of nailing down the definite cause. I suspect what most (if not all) of us have really been doing is playing.
It was an opinion based on assumptions , I was already corrected by another Cmdr who explained it better, In your case being a backer of 250 pounds IMHO you won't get a penny back sorry, maybe the price of the released game.
I really do not care when or for how much you backed the game, I don't care when you joined the forum either, it's irrelevant. Oh and I certainly was not giving you or anyone else hassle.
I will wish you good luck with your refund.
At this point the only thing that's massive is claimed to be the background simulation, but it still screams glassbox to me.
That assumes that finding the fun in a game is not a part of the testing process. It is.
I don't see any difference between those who have been involved in the Alpha/Beta testing and those still waiting, except perhaps for the fact that Alpha/Beta players have been more jerked about than most others. They have invested their own time and effort into the game already, only to learn that if they ultimately wanted an offline game, then it was all for nought.
- Status