I clicked the link then pressed ctrl and f, I then typed "Sorry" in the search bar, the word does not appear on the page.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
I clicked the link then pressed ctrl and f, I then typed "Sorry" in the search bar, the word does not appear on the page.
the launch of ED in 2014 is done in utter confidence by the team coding it - that much we know. nothing is rushed, FDEV know they have the core of a stunning game with awesome tech (VR chiefly) here. they are even so calm and bold to streamline the release candidate.
FDEV comitted to 2014 release in late august, they are delivering it, they will keep updating with similar speed as they have until now. by mid next year they will already have a stronger product in the market with a good, development sustaining userbase.
and i trust some healing, soulsearching and learning has been done by then on all sides, too. so that we are all back to telling our stories in the biggest & best spaceopera there is ^^
Heh, no that fits
I had the boss from the IT crowd in mind when I wrote it.. well him and an old boss of mine actually 
Elite: Dangerous was confirmed as a space sim you could play offline.
Star Citizen was confirmed as one you could not (without hypothetical not fully confirmed private servers), except for Squadron 42 (which is supposed to be playable offline).
I understand that offline play may have been sidelined in light of the upcoming release, but I still don't get why it is "probably never" going to happen. If the dynamic stuff runs on a separate process, just allow single-player to run that server process locally. Minecraft did this so that they could merge their online and offline codebases - essentially when you run Minecraft offline it starts up a local-server and you connect to in on localhost in the background. Also, not having the "vision" of the online game present in the offline game is fine, I would expect some features to be missing on an offline experience - 'Elite II with nicer GFX' would be fully acceptable in my personal opinion. I totally accept that offline-single-player may not be a release-day feature, I'm sure it needs a bunch of work that's better spent getting the whole finished and polished, but I am not happy that its 'off the table' ( even if after considerable attempts and fretting over making it work ). Nothing is impossible in code.
Sorry - bad context switch
The 'misleading' point refers to #offlinegate. But that said, David's body language is really interesting in the clip. I think he's coming to terms with the fact that planetary landing and leaving the ship are going to be way harder than they expected, and they may never deliver them before the money runs out, the servers shut down, or whatever. Sad.
Last edited:
We're back into unprovable conspiracy theory territory, with wild accusations that Frontier only exist to defraud innocent backers.
Bit weird calling it "caving" when it was a promised feature. How about wording it "The only thing they are *not* doing is reversing their decision and reinstating the promised feature, despite the vocal demand"? Sounds much better, no?
Promised? While I appreciate the annoyance I yet again have to go back to the fact that this is not a commission. This is not a pre-order. This was you electing to put your money behind a developer because you believed in their vision for the game. At the time, they hoped to include it but have decided that it would negatively effect the product.
If it negatively effects the end product it should be removed. Period. Even if for whatever reason they decided their vision was to make it a console game that I couldn't play I would support it because that is their decision.
Would I request a refund? sure. But that's only because I bought it through their store, not kickstarter.
Kickstarting something implies you trust the developer to do what's best for the end product. Even if it isn't the best for you.
Pretty clear answer from almost 1000 Beta backers, when questions in poll are put right (and there is no outsiders such SC/EvE fanboys messing up voting):
(A) I can't ever play without Offline Mode (internet is unavailable or very intermittent)
34 3.62%
(A) I can't play sometimes without Offline Mode (internet only available sometimes)
71 7.57%
(A) I can play most of the time without Offline Mode (occasional lack of reliable internet)
76 8.10%
(A) I don't need Offline Mode now, but want it for when the servers are switched-off
267 28.46%
(A) I'd like Offline Mode, but can live without it
191 20.36%
(A) I don't care about Offline Mode.
334 35.61%
(B) Offline Mode can be a completely unchanging galaxy (static markets, missions, stations, etc)
270 28.78%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to have randomly changing markets, but otherwise can be unchanging
178 18.98%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to allow updates (once a month) to stay in sync with the multiplayer galaxy
109 11.62%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to have almost all features of multiplayer galaxy (likely impossible!)
44 4.69%
(A) I can't ever play without Offline Mode (internet is unavailable or very intermittent)
34 3.62%
(A) I can't play sometimes without Offline Mode (internet only available sometimes)
71 7.57%
(A) I can play most of the time without Offline Mode (occasional lack of reliable internet)
76 8.10%
(A) I don't need Offline Mode now, but want it for when the servers are switched-off
267 28.46%
(A) I'd like Offline Mode, but can live without it
191 20.36%
(A) I don't care about Offline Mode.
334 35.61%
(B) Offline Mode can be a completely unchanging galaxy (static markets, missions, stations, etc)
270 28.78%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to have randomly changing markets, but otherwise can be unchanging
178 18.98%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to allow updates (once a month) to stay in sync with the multiplayer galaxy
109 11.62%
(B) Offline Mode NEEDS to have almost all features of multiplayer galaxy (likely impossible!)
44 4.69%
This is the big take-home for me. They couldn't do it in the newsletter before The Event and they sure couldn't just let it be a happy surprise when it was released. They would have been totally crucified.
Now is the moment when pre-sales have been maximised and there's time to let it die down and drop out of the news cycle.
Even if, for the sake of argument it is just some sort of coincidence the timings panned out this way, that's not how it looks. It looks cynical and out in the wide world that's how it'll be seen.
I don't for one moment believe this realisation only struck them on this week.
I'm enjoying ED enough to keep going but sorry, I'm from the 'if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck' school of thinking.
I don't believe we'll see planetary landings happen. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong, because I want it so bad, but when I consider the obstacles.... it just doesn't look very likely. Walking around your ship.... very achievable. Walking around spacestations.... also very achievable, but meaningful content is going to be an issue. Landing on planets, walking around terrain and cities.... I'm struggling to see it.
It also means no pause, which, when you have kids for example, is a convenient feature.
It also means no save/load facility in sight, which removes a convenient way of repeat destructive experimentation, be it flying close to ships/stars/rocks, speed docking a puma clipper through a narrow Coriolis entrance or police viper survival standoff. Crashing ships in creative ways will be costly, in time and currency. Collecting game saves in scenic areas to revisit later is also out of the picture.
It also means that altering the rules would give you an unacceptable advantage in a potentially-multiplayer universe. Therefore modding is definitely out of the way, be it cosmetic (unfair to people having paid money for a wireframe paint) or physics-related (like removing the recently discovered maximum-speed-of-ships cosmological constant or the yaw axis sluggishness).
It's not all about the connection. The connection isn't an issue for me, but the features written off in advance mean that the game is a space mmo, not the Frontier/FFE reimplementation i was hoping for. I'll still play it and enjoy it for what it is, but it won't match my hopes/expectations.
Not true.
I'm merely pointing out something that can be verified by yourself.
People who have spotty internet access are discerning shoppers. Titles that don't offer offline-play need not apply. We have to do some real research other than 'does this game have a nooblance?'. Just saying.
You shouldn't have any jumping ships in solo online. Have you been playing in Open? Open has also improved vastly with the last few patches, especially 3.05
Oh it's quite possible with good PG.
As you say though, the issue (like with stations) will be the content... and I suspect you may be right. I'll believe it when I see it. This whole episode has harmed FD in ways I don't think they're even aware of yet.
Last edited:
I am not sure this applies in the UK. Money changed hands, therefore there is a contract (written or not) for them to supply the goods as advertised.
Kickstarter seems like a grey area - I really wish the authorities would step in and make a ruling. This is not the first time that people on kickstarter have got badly burnt by cowboys.
For you maybe. For some of us beta 3 is an unplayable mess.
Sorry - bad context switch
I agree that he certainly seems to decide to bite his tongue when talking about that. I'd really like to know why - hopefully it's just down to the fact that he doesn't want to talk about it.
But nonetheless, it's interesting how all the talk from Froniter about expansions these past few weeks has been about walking outside ships, with only a very small bit about planetary landings. Whether we get them or not, they will be at least 3 years away. 18 months to get walking then another 18 or more for planets. And that's with me remaining hopeful about it...
Last edited:
- Status