No Single Player offline Mode then?

[Gazz]

That's not a real alternative for a new player who doesn't have the ship or experience to travel very far.
He would have to collect the scraps that were left in the "mined out" central systems.


Actually, there is another alternative.


Let a new player decide to spawn in a random location on the far border of the universe.
No one can tell me that this would be difficult feature to create.

This way you may actually get to explore something even if you haven't logged in at day 1 of the launch.

 

[Tony Grunt]

Not really.

Even when you're going solo, the environment and markets is still influenced by other players. You just can't see them.

Not just that, your client must always stay updated, if the server updates you wouldn't be able to connect to single player until your client was updated however much time this takes.

 

[littleminxundr]

People did NOT buy INTO beta! Beta access (unpayed tester job) was a goodie to a PRE-Purchase of a game that included OFFLINE capability... If you carefully read the terms on the store, which must have been posted hundreds of times, carefully, there are no uncertain terms for cancelling the order!

"or from the day of the conclusion of the contract, in the case of services or digital content not supplied in a tangible medium", as in receiving access to the final game you actually bought (opposed to a testing framework for "invaluable feedback and tracking down bugs (FDs own words).

Further:
"You may cancel a pre-order for a Digital Product up to and including the day before the release date of the relevant Digital Product by contacting Customer Services clearly stating your order number and item(s) to be cancelled." the RELEVANT product in this case being the actual game! Again not what we used to HELP Frontier Developers to find bugs, test game mechanics etc.

Also keep in mind, usually play testers are HIRED to test these things and help in checking performance and stability.
In our case with the added benefit of thousands of different hardware compositions, which is always tough on developers who do in-house testing.

To be clear about that, I have no problem with help testing and not getting payed for my work, as in return, I could have a look at what parts of the final product may look like.

Just understand, people are rightfully angry about that last minute decision. If they choose to get the pre-order cancelled and want a refund I think it is the least FD should do. If FD does not refund with "evasive" answers, these customers are in their legal rights to take further actions, as in revoking payment through credit cards and fight it out in a court.
The later being not good for either FD nor the remaining community as it can easily end in financial desaster!

Just my thoughts...

When you buy in to the Beta; those are the terms.
Those who pre-ordered and then paid €15 more for the beta, changed their contract with Frontier; they waved their pre-order for the Beta, which includes getting the Mercenary edition for free as thank you for participating in the Beta over pre-ordering.

 

[foxpur]

Please, tell me... why would someone pay more for beta access... and then not play that beta? Wouldn't that be a pretty bloody stupid thing to do? Are we supposed to be in the business of throwing away money or something?

As said before, I'm not pushing for a refund, despite being gutted at their decision, but the notion that people who bought in to the beta aren't getting refunds because they've actually played it... what?!

I really don't know that answer.
And no, they are not getting refunds because they paid for a idea, not a game, with that plan of when a games is out they get it. The money was for a concept and technically non-refundable. There are a few exceptions for that.

 

[Wolframium]

This can not be said enough. People are behaving in a malicious, destructive manner. It's one of the ugliest aspect of human behaviour - spite. You gain nothing, all you want to do is lash out because you are upset.

I agree with you some people appear to be acting out of spite, but I'm sure you will also agree with me that many of us are simply trying to make our voices heard in a civilized and non-destructive way. Also, who's to say there is nothing to be gained? Companies have been known to correct their mistakes following strongly negative feedback from the base in the past.

For those who backed a Kickstarter without understanding the risks, I'm sorry for you. I understand it stings. KS is new, and it's different from being a pure business model. It's closer to charity and voting with your wallet to allow unusual projects to happen.

I am not going to get into the technical aspect of this problem: I'll openly admit I am no legal expert, so I leave that to those with the time, energy and knowledge required to actually analyze it in a factual and rational way. But technical considerations aside, even assuming that FD were indeed not legally bound to refund the backers, that would not imply they couldn't do it anyway. From a moral standpoint, it would be the right thing to do: "hey, I'm sorry, I know you funded a product before we even started developing it because you placed your trust in me, and I realize I have failed you by making a product that is entirely different from what you wanted and from what I had told you several times that I would deliver, so, fair's fair, here's your money back". I know, I am talking about proper morals, something practically non-existant and for many people even laughable in a capitalist society where a company's only moral obligation is to deliver profits to its shareholders without cheating too much (or at least without getting caught).

 

[Zuikaku]

I still do not understand their explanations over cancellation of offline mode. I woul'd like someone from FDs to clearly answer these questions:

1. If frontier games were able to run non dynamic galaxy on fraction of today's processor power, how ED is not capable doing so on modern computers
2. If only 30Bps are required to run online game, that is obviously not the data local computers coul'd not process on their own
3. Offline players said they are happy with static galaxy without cool and exciting new stuff and you have cancelled offline mode stating these exact reasons
4. Obviously you do have some sort of offline mode. why don't you just include it in the game. you may not be happy with it, but players obviously will be happy and any offline mode is better than none
5. there are copy protection methods other than "allways connected". If that was the issue, I'm sure offline players woul'd not have anything aginst periodicall copy protection checks
6. Why don't you just not release offline mode 6 months after the online and only with secrets who are already discovered in online multiplayer if you are so concerned about "unfair offline players".
7. Offline players also clearly stated on many occassions that all they want is frontier like game with it's boring universe with ED graphics. They didn't wanted anything dynamic, synched or groovy. why didn't you respected that?


I know i woul'd not ge the answers from the devs...

 

[DazzyB]

Drop the dead donkey.

This! Give it a rest now - we all have to accept that this is the direction they are going in. Sorry to sound harsh but it's true!!!!!!!!

 

[gravityztr]

Here is some proof from the kickstarter website...

It's clearly the game that David Braben wanted to make for a very long time... Imagine what they can do with current technology, squeezing the last drop of performance ? it will add surely breath-taking visuals, but also richer experiences, also netwrking capabilities.... ( i sum it up )

read here, some quotes from the kickstarter page that clearly indicates it is the next elite, and can also benefit of networking:

Imagine what is now possible, squeezing the last drop of performance from modern computers in the way “Elite” and “Frontier” did in their days? It is not just a question of raw performance (though of course these elements will make it look gorgeous), but we can push the way the networking works too – something very few people had access to in the days of Frontier.

Elite: Dangerous is the game I have wanted Frontier to make for a very long time. The next game in the Elite series - an amazing space epic with stunning visuals, incredible gameplay and breath-taking scope, but this time you can play with your friends too. I want a game that feels more like the original “Elite” to fly, and with more rapid travel (to allow for the multi-player nature of the game) – so you travel quickly using local ‘hyperspace’ travel rather than by fast-forwarding time – but with the rich galaxy of Frontier – and more, so much more.

But it is true that it was not clear. the information given was sparse, but there we have this gem: the FAQ includes this question:

How will Single Player works ? Will i need to connect to a server to play ?

and here's the Braben's answer:

The galaxy for Elite: Dangerous is a shared universe maintained by a central server. All of the meta data for the galaxy is shared between players. This includes the galaxy itself as well as transient information like economies. The aim here is that a player's actions will influence the development of the galaxy, without necessarily having to play multiplayer.

The other important aspect for us is that we can seed the galaxy with events, often these events will be triggered by player actions. With a living breathing galaxy players can discover new and interesting things long after they have started playing.

Update! The above is the intended single player experience. However it will be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server. You won't get the features of the evolving galaxy (although we will investigate minimising those differences) and you probably won't be able to sync between server and non-server (again we'll investigate).

I have to say... we are kinda dumbfounded here... David said it even 2 years ago, ebfore the game was funded, that it was a central server acting as the sort of galaxy with exchange.... but me , at that time, like all yours, we just didnt knew what this meant. we all thought of getting a single player experience just as Frontier : elite 2 or Frontier First Encounter.....

it seems that it was true indeed guys who read me here.... the game wasnt built the same way as the previous games.... !

 

[ScottGust]

Im sooooo excited to play in dedicated offline mode with no internet connection....I just cant seem to find the button to make it work...hmmm....... .....

 

[OillyRag]

please merge this thread with the single player Offline thread where it belongs

 

[Martin1956]

I still do not understand their explanations over cancellation of offline mode. I woul'd like someone from FDs to clearly answer these questions:

1. If frontier games were able to run non dynamic galaxy on fraction of today's processor power, how ED is not capable doing so on modern computers
2. If only 30Bps are required to run online game, that is obviously not the data local computers coul'd not process on their own
3. Offline players said they are happy with static galaxy without cool and exciting new stuff and you have cancelled offline mode stating these exact reasons
4. Obviously you do have some sort of offline mode. why don't you just include it in the game. you may not be happy with it, but players obviously will be happy and any offline mode is better than none
5. there are copy protection methods other than "allways connected". If that was the issue, I'm sure offline players woul'd not have anything aginst periodicall copy protection checks
6. Why don't you just not release offline mode 6 months after the online and only with secrets who are already discovered in online multiplayer if you are so concerned about "unfair offline players".
7. Offline players also clearly stated on many occassions that all they want is frontier like game with it's boring universe with ED graphics. They didn't wanted anything dynamic, synched or groovy. why didn't you respected that?


I know i woul'd not ge the answers from the devs...

I suspect that it would be due to all the additional linkages that would need to be input into the game structure and the massive impact this would have on the performance of the core game. So in trying to resolve this for some it would probably break it for the wider online community which I believe will turn out to be the vast majority

 

[Juniper]

Seriously, someone's going to have to enlighten me on this point.

Please, tell me... why would someone pay more for beta access... and then not play that beta? Wouldn't that be a pretty bloody stupid thing to do? Are we supposed to be in the business of throwing away money or something?

As said before, I'm not pushing for a refund, despite being gutted at their decision, but the notion that people who bought in to the beta aren't getting refunds because they've actually played it... what?!

Nonsensical beyond words.

Not sure why anyone would do that in FD's store to be honest, but on Kickstarter there's a class of backer who seems to just back things that he / she perceives as being worthwhile. They may have no interest in the rewards offered, but they back it anyway. Presumably they think that the world needs to have this 'thing'. I don't know. I just know that it happens.

There's also a lot of people who have backed or bought the game who just don't sign up for the forums, and some may even forget about it or decide just to wait until release because they're heavily into something else at the time.

Plenty of reasons not to bother with the beta when it comes to it.

 

[Mr.Miner]

I still do not understand their explanations over cancellation of offline mode. I woul'd like someone from FDs to clearly answer these questions:

1. If frontier games were able to run non dynamic galaxy on fraction of today's processor power, how ED is not capable doing so on modern computers
2. If only 30Bps are required to run online game, that is obviously not the data local computers coul'd not process on their own
3. Offline players said they are happy with static galaxy without cool and exciting new stuff and you have cancelled offline mode stating these exact reasons
4. Obviously you do have some sort of offline mode. why don't you just include it in the game. you may not be happy with it, but players obviously will be happy and any offline mode is better than none
5. there are copy protection methods other than "allways connected". If that was the issue, I'm sure offline players woul'd not have anything aginst periodicall copy protection checks
6. Why don't you just not release offline mode 6 months after the online and only with secrets who are already discovered in online multiplayer if you are so concerned about "unfair offline players".
7. Offline players also clearly stated on many occassions that all they want is frontier like game with it's boring universe with ED graphics. They didn't wanted anything dynamic, synched or groovy. why didn't you respected that?


I know i woul'd not ge the answers from the devs...

I can only answer #3. FD does not want to release a static, stripped down, un-exciting game to the marketplace. They thought they could make it exciting, turns out it would, in their eyes, be crap. They don't want to release crap.

You clearly don't have to agree, but they don't want to a stripped down version to bring down the whole.

 

[Tony Grunt]

You just joined the forum today and expect anyone to take you seriously?

Judge by the context of his message and not how long he has been here or how many posts he has. Are you saying that me and my posts are not welcomed here because I joined only for the reason this thread exists?

 

[Adept]

Why are you, and others, so confident about this "archived server" idea? To me DB's statement on that sounded like a throwaway promise just to keep the unruly mob docile.

There are too many holes......

Does he really mean it?
Should it all end how much control will he have over what happens next?
Who will he give the archive to?
What guarantee do we have that they'll support it as we'd like?

Do you see what I mean?

I see ugly paranoia and an attack on DB's character.

 

[ScottGust]

please merge this thread with the single player Offline thread where it belongs

actually please dont, the horse is dead.

 

[gravityztr]

but then guys, look here at this important quote :

Update! The above is the intended single player experience. However it will be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server. You won't get the features of the evolving galaxy (although we will investigate minimising those differences) and you probably won't be able to sync between server and non-server (again we'll investigate).

all of that means that the game is a central server that IS the galaxy, the game. Players will be able to play either in multiplayer , or in solo mode if they want, but all of this will be part of the central server, which acts like the game.

but as we can all read here folks, David said that it will be possible to have a single player game without connectiong to the server galaxy....


well , how of this works ? if the central galaxy is THE GAME ??

well David said at that time that HE wanted to make it possible, understanding the pain it will cause if they are none.understanding the importance.

so David said you [probably] wont be able to sync between server and non-server.

That in my opinion, means that if you want to play single player, without the central server, well that game wont be the same as in-server...

it will never be able to go in-server mode. because the thing is different...

so as you see, *they* had it even at that time. and KNEW that it was a problem for people wanting to have the wonderful single player off-server experience.


thanks for hearing me

 

[Juniper]

I see ugly paranoia and an attack on DB's character.

No, just clarification on a somewhat vague and nebulous "promise".

I would add one more to the list: "If it's easy to do in the future, why can't it be done now?"

 

[Zulu Romeo]

But what really defines the offline experience is that no one else messes with me or my game!
That should be possible.

So this is the real reason for offline then. Everybody wants their own Galaxy for themselves. That's what this "debate" all comes down to.

Tough.

In this game, if you want your own galaxy then you're going to have to fight for it.

It's called "Elite: Dangerous," not "Elite: Entitlement."

 

[WeirdWizard]

I see ugly paranoia and an attack on DB's character.

I don't know David Braben and I assume you don't. We can only judge him in respect to the way he conducts himself publicly and the way Frontier operates, which he as CEO is ultimately responsible for.