No Single Player offline Mode then?

[gazzareth]

I am a bit gobsmacked that they went back on this, as well as the fact that the people buying the released version will now not get the gamma either which was stated in the kickstarter (actually said that they would get access AFTER BETA which everyone logically assumed meant access to the Gamma version).

Originally I had planned on playing the Offline version - although that had changed anyway and I favoured the Online, but even so it is a kick in the teeth. The whole tone of the newsletter reeks of expectation management which is a bit worrying....

G

 

[Dante80]

Joe Spivey > What you're talking about, and is referred to in the newsletter, is simply the single player online we currently have. Meaning an internet connection, even if it's not permanent, is mandatory. And also meaning that if and when the servers are offline, no one will be able to play.

It also means that you cannot mod the game since a big part of it will be on the central server and your client/local files would have to be verified to proceed.

All in all, a very disappointing decision. And sadly, one that is not going to change. They'd have to redo the game from scratch for that to happen. Which --btw-- this has been known to FDEV for a long long time.

 

[LeiHarper]

As mentioned in the newsletter thread the game has changed a lot since the initial kickstarter. One of the biggest changes is the importance of the the offline component to manage the galaxy and interactions. This isn't something we can translate into an offline experience as we'd effectively have to make a new game world - we couldn't share the same world and that throws out the intent for a shared universe.

Michael

Michael,

While I'm not one of the people that this affects (my internet is fine and I like multiplayer) I can see why people here are distressed. Was this a recent decision, and if not do you not think it is something that should have been communicated to the player base sooner? I frequently see posts here about folks excited for the offline only mode because of unreliable internet, being a deployed soldier, etc. There seemed to be a non-trivial number of backers that would really like to have known about this in advance.

Thanks,

~Lei

 

[Kyrgan]

This newsletter was a very unwelcome one.

I can't imagine that Eliteangerous, of all games, would truly need this. It's as much a game about solitude, patience, exploration and you vs. the void than combat, trading and whatnot.

I understand where the developers are coming from, there are many reasons to cut single-player true offline mode...

1) it's a DRM thing (don't deny it, this is part of the reason, even if you have other more noble justifications).
2) the game's dynamic features are a selling point, if lots of people are playing in true offline, there's no community fueling that dynamism.
3) true offline mode will be a poorer experience, if people choose to play it this way the game might come off as boring, empty and hurt it's image
4) a lot of the game's systems are not autonomous. Missions are dead simple, there are no believable NPCs, comm chatter, events, or anything that would lend life to the universe, baking these into the engine would be quite an endeavour and definitely out of the 16th of December deadline, so injecting the events server-side is economical (time-wise).
5) as the above implies the game is not "finished" in the traditional sense, this is not a game you "ship", the foundation is there (don't get me wrong, it's a great foundation), but for all the dynamic systems and fancy graphics and mechanics, there's no story (even an overarching one that's in no way about the player), there's no lore, there are no characters you can identify with and see what they're up to, it's just not something you can play without help from the server and have it believable... in this sense the newsletter is on the mark.

That being said, they are poor reasons to alienate Elite fans, fans of the series (and dare I say flight/space simulators in general) are not a social or online bunch. They are also not a young bunch. I have a kid and a 40h/week job, inability to pause the game or having deadlines on missions (some with heavy penalties for failure now) are very irritating. And although I'm not in that demographic, there's a bunch of players that travel a lot, live in rural or underdeveloped areas with truly crappy internet (although mine is nothing to write home about), even military or people who work on international aid. All these people have a hard time getting and staying online on constant or stable fashion.

My question for the developers is this:
What is inferior when you don't have an internet connection available? A static, uneventful space simulation with gorgeous graphics and plenty to do (people are playing the Beta and are pretty happy, no?), or NO GAME AT ALL?

Make the connection daily if you have to, make progress while offline for more than a couple of hours not count, if you must, make the only default option online and have players who want to play true offline jump through hoops (firewall, disconnect wi-fi/cable) but don't make people UNABLE to play when they really don't have a connection. It doesn't matter if it's not the majority of players, it's a matter of respect and keeping your word.

Wel all know offline will suck, and we don't care, we want it anyway.

 

[littleminxundr]

Nothing crazy about that at all, i for one share your view.
Rest assured the game EULA will cover them on all eventualities, just as any other online-game EULA does.
From what i've experienced up til now, i am less than convinced that their networking structure/servers are fit for the job.
And with dec. 16th approaching, i am worried about hearing yet another "We didn't anticipate the amount of new player influx"-excuse.
I've seen too many online-games publishers cutting that particular cost corner at launch, to then slowly (god forbid any overcapacity is created) adjust to real numbers.
An offline mode would have alleviated that pressure, because people would be able to play at least.
No need to doomsay of course, but once again in a game launch i anticipate, the writing is on the wall......could have done without that

Yeah, the first three weeks are going to be nightmarish and then game is dead in the water. It happened with all allways online games that I know off, with the exception of DiabloIII that successfully managed to turn the tide around, by chancing the MMO-ish nature of the game and going full on console with it. I hardly touch my PC version of DiabloIII, but the PS4 version is a joy to play. I really love it. But Blizzard also has the financial means to turn a mistake around.
Frontier just squandered our trust and that will right now work against them. They've shot themselves in the foot pre-launch as a lot of disgruntled backers will take this to their social media hang outs. Substantial damage to Elite's future can be achieved by midnight today.
I already dropped the bomb on my Facebook and my gamingfriends will carry the message forward. This mistake will cost Frontier a lot of future sales as I'll surely not be the only one doing this...

 

[srinidhalaya]

Wow, so disappointed. I really looked forward to this game, and it turns out it is no different than any of the blockbuster titles after all. For a while, it seemed as if this title was a breath of fresh air, in a polluted market of greed. Great, now I get to crawfish out of the arguments I made for this game to my friends, of which Offline mode was my strongest point.

 

[J.M.Braehe]

All you commanders whom are overly tee'd about "solo-offline" really need to calm down and THINK about their reactions. If we all just turn into 5 year olds who want ONE FEATURE and start screaming, "I WANT MY MONEY BACK!" sure FD may well give in to it, and return said money. But what it will change, is this. The more people asking for their money back are more features, that those of us sticking with it, will never see. You want to EVER SEE THOSE FEATURES? Stick with the game. IMO solo offline was a drawing feature, but not required, and obviously, nothing in the kickstarter was set in stone, nor was the crowdfunding site ever a legally binding contract regarding the features that would be available at release. Your ISP is crap? i'm sorry, how is it FDEV's responsibility to provide you with a seamless game experience with an online game (face it, this was the primary marketing focus) when its the SERVICE (ISP) you pay for that is letting you down?

Fact is fact. This was never OUR game to direct, and FD have always said, they were making the game THEY want (would be happy to) play.

That said, I'm not happy at the implications of some of the missing features, but this is game development without a publisher (and without 60mil in hyped up ship sales). And I'm happy I get to see this truly BEAST of a game in its final iteration, and get to explore this massive galaxy they have provided us with.


PS: theres a major difference in "promised" and "initially planned", and i think many of you will find that the latter term is much closer to what has happened. We werent REALLY PROMISED anything other than starting options, and a finished game (state and final features to be determined during development). I suggest you all seriously think this thru before continuing with your toddling hissy fits.

 

[iFred]

Thought that was a kickstarter-goal?

 

[Doolittle]

I'm beginning to seriously doubt that I read the same newsletter as some of the contributors to this thread. What I took from it was that from time to time you can log onto the game to update your galaxy so that it comes into line with what is going on in the dynamic galaxy. Sounds like a plus to me designed to stop the offline game becoming stale. 'Time to time' being once a week or once a month or whenever you can get access.

Time to go read instead of relying on bad interpretation. That sounds reasonable. As long as you can still play if you don't have a connection, just update it from time to time.

 

[noodle]

As mentioned in the newsletter thread the game has changed a lot since the initial kickstarter. One of the biggest changes is the importance of the the offline component to manage the galaxy and interactions. This isn't something we can translate into an offline experience as we'd effectively have to make a new game world - we couldn't share the same world and that throws out the intent for a shared universe.

Michael

Not good enough, Michael. A lot of us pledged on the basis of this promise. You've pretty much wiped out all the good will and trust that I felt towards FD. My boxed copy is completely pointless now, and I regret ever having pledged for it.

 

[Darth Krayt]

They'd have to redo the game from scratch for that to happen. Which --btw-- this has been known to FDEV for a long long time.

Why would they have to redo the game from scratch? Client/Server games have been around for years where your PC runs both components. For example, Quake, Half Life and their derivatives.

 

[Pibbles]

All you commanders whom are overly tee'd about "solo-offline" really need to calm down and THINK about their reactions. If we all just turn into 5 year olds who want ONE FEATURE and start screaming, "I WANT MY MONEY BACK!" sure FD may well give in to it, and return said money. But what it will change, is this. The more people asking for their money back are more features, that those of us sticking with it, will never see. .

That's a rather selfish view. I would never need offline, I have always on broadband in both my homes. But I'd never expect someone who IS affected to put up and shut up just so I may get some features later on!

Wow.

 

[Windsaw]

We werent REALLY PROMISED anything other than starting options, and a finished game

I am quoting the Kickstart FAQ:

it will be possible to...

It doesn't get much more unambiguous than this.

 

[Sir Render]

Sorry if some wise commander has already said this, but I failed to read all the posts.

I may be wrong but-----------------

If you are here now, have you not been playing with a need for internet connection since you started.

Yes I would like to play off line.

does it say constantly connected?

I will wait and see, although I do wish they would give more details, a lot more in fact they must know so tell us

 

[Kayweg]

In the EU the EULA can be thrown away. It's not applicable in nearly all cases, the law over-rides all and since June 13th it is VERY clear in this sort of scenario. The buyer is entitled to a refund even if the game has been played. Digital content is undoubtedly now treated the same as all other goods in the EU, they have to be as described. End of story, no EULA can sign that away, even if you sign a piece of paper in blood.

Thanks for pointing that out. I was aware that in some countries those EULAs were at least contestable, what i was not aware of (if i understand you correctly) is, that there now is clear EU legislation on this topic.
No idea how i managed to miss this, consider me corrected.
I'll have to look that up in more detail, i stand by the rest of my post.

 

[SentineI]

As mentioned in the newsletter thread the game has changed a lot since the initial kickstarter. One of the biggest changes is the importance of the the offline component to manage the galaxy and interactions. This isn't something we can translate into an offline experience as we'd effectively have to make a new game world - we couldn't share the same world and that throws out the intent for a shared universe.

I think backers fully understood that an offline game would NOT share (exactly) the same universe. It's pretty obvious really. And I also think it's clear that it would be a lesser experience than the online one (no injected events, no evolution of the galaxy). So your stated excuse doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Michael Brookes]

Change is good, as long it is within the boundaries of promised features for which we paid you money.
The promesed features have to have priority over everything else.

Indeed and the biggest promise is the game with the vision we set out with. We haven't taken this decision lightly, but having to hamper the game to work offline would have meant that we couldn't deliver the game we're making.

Michael

 

[Havner]

I will wait and see, although I do wish they would give more details, a lot more in fact they must know so tell us

The fact they made is so vague makes you think it's going to be as it is now. Solo play with 100% online.
If they were to do a partial offline with connecting once a week they could as well make a full offline play. So this is what we'll get. Seriously thinking about a refund. This is not what I was promised I backed.

Indeed and the biggest promise is the game with the vision we set out with. We haven't taken this decision lightly, but having to hamper the game to work offline would have meant that we couldn't deliver the game we're making.

You'd be only making an offline a little worse, that's all. You'd still deliver online with all the features. And believe me. Most people here would be 100% satisfied with that. You said in KS FAQ that offline might not get updates. We agreed on that. Now you're taking that away.

 

[Pibbles]

Thanks for pointing that out. I was aware that in some countries those EULA's were at least contestable, what i was not aware off (if i understand you correctly) is, that there now is clear EU legislation on this topic.
No idea how i managed to miss this, consider me corrected.
I'll have to look that up in more detail, i stand by the rest of my post.

Yes, since 13th June this year digital content was made 100% under the protection of all consumer laws across the EU.

It's actually written in the relevant law that it is impossible to sign away your rights by way of a EULA. It cannot be done.

This means fit for purpose\as described laws that already exist, are forced to apply to digital content, since 13th June.

No EU citizen should allow themselves to get fobbed off here, IF this affects them.

To those it does not affect, that's great but please remember there are many people that are affected by this and made an expensive purchase decision based on what now turns out to be false marketing.

Happy to take PM from anyone on this matter, I had a very similar case on another matter (photographic solution) and won.

 

[Michael Brookes]

I think backers fully understood that an offline game would NOT share the same universe. It's pretty obvious really. And I also think it's clear that it would be a lesser experience than the online one (no injected events, no evolution of the galaxy). So your stated excuse doesn't make sense to me.

The problem is that the galaxy mechanics all sit on the online servers. The data set and processes are huge and not something that would translate offline without considerable compromise to the vision. Trust me we didn't sit down and think what would annoy people the most! It's a choice we've had to make and so we've taken it.

Michael