but that's the point - the majority of them can use it.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
but that's the point - the majority of them can use it.
I'd been polite but hey wonderful examples such as yourself I've decided to flip over to the dark side, over reaction perhaps, I'm not doing a charge back I'm not calling for lawyers. I'd have happily walked away with the refund and said thank you and good luck.
Might as well get my moneys worth as the white knights have at our disgust and outrage eh?
As for promoting the business dealings I consider seriously shady. If it prevents others getting themselves into a similar situation then yes I'll be more than happy to extol my views and experiences as a cautionary tale. Might as well "test" the limits of this product witnin its legal bounds as I'm stuck with it
Last edited:
Strawman argument.
A big part of it is the offline experience. Playing a game where you're not racing against an army of kids who can play nearly 24/7. A game where you can "explore" something because you got there first. Because there is no other player in the galaxy.
I don't expect you to understand that but a lot of us old fogeys do.
I see a lot of this behaviour on the forum at the moment.
It feels like because they haven't got what they want they are determined to tear down the game for the rest of us.
It's not pleasant to watch, and frustrating because there is no talking to them.
+1 for highlighting this.
The problem here is that "solo" isn't solo at all really, is it?
OK, you don't meet another player - but that's only a tiny piece of the puzzle here.
Deleted member 47764
D
About them giving out the server code or whatever if they go under.
When they exit the market for whatever reason, they will sell the company assets to maximize profit (Companies are often forced to by their creditors). With those assets come all their IP.
When the game is sold it is up to the new owner what he does with the IP, the new owner is not beholden to past promises, if you buy something you don't hand it out afterwards.
This has happened multiple times in the past.
When they exit the market for whatever reason, they will sell the company assets to maximize profit (Companies are often forced to by their creditors). With those assets come all their IP.
When the game is sold it is up to the new owner what he does with the IP, the new owner is not beholden to past promises, if you buy something you don't hand it out afterwards.
This has happened multiple times in the past.
I'll add that there's a Design Decision Forum composed by people that paid a *lot* of money to be at least somewhat informed and consulted regarding the development of the game.
Essentialy they (we) paid to be a focus group, where FD were able to test their ideas and see how the public would react to them.
Some members put in a really large amount of effort into helping FD attaining their vision.
Needless to say, there were never any consultation about this surprise there. So much for paying to be kept informed...
Essentialy they (we) paid to be a focus group, where FD were able to test their ideas and see how the public would react to them.
Some members put in a really large amount of effort into helping FD attaining their vision.
Needless to say, there were never any consultation about this surprise there. So much for paying to be kept informed...
Not here to argue one way or another. Just an observation that may not be correct.
It's my guess that FD has a fairly clear picture of the numbers involved (based on this forum and refund requests) up to this point. They also know the number of new sales that have occurred post announcement.
If new sales numbers are close to what they expected then the bad PR may not be having that large of an effect and they expect it to blow over. Even the bad PR is advertising and many may not care about it.
Those affected will try to keep it going but eventually it will die down, eventually.
This leaves only legal recourse for those claiming they are wronged and owed money. This may or may not be harder then you think, depending on what country you are in. The FD lawyers have surely taken this into consideration.
If going the legal route you may want to consider postings you may have made on this forum. Everything on here is the property of FD and can be used against you by FD in a lawsuit.
Also I personally would stay away from logging into the game, and not install any further updates. Doing so may be seen as acceptance of the product. I am not a lawyer and may be completely wrong on this point.
Again these are just my personal thoughts and may be way off base. There is no intent here to judge the actions of those affected.
Good Luck and hope you guys can achieve some level of satisfaction from this mess.
Last edited:
I think this covers it pretty good and saves me from writing it:
"Well, there you have if folks. Newsletter #50 makes it painfully clear: "This whole issue comes down to what the vision is of the game we are making..."
Like I said: we entered into this with mutually incompatible visions of the game, we just didn't know it.
And: "Is offline mode an impossible problem, or just unfeasible?
It is a creative decision, not wanting to produce an empty game."
This was a choice, not an unavoidable consequence of technical or even budgetary constraints. Braben/FD *CHOSE* not to develop a game that matched the things they originally said which convinced us to give them our money.
Sure, they can mince words about it if they want, to shirk the moral obligation to provide refunds or any kind of recompense to those of us that didn't read between the lines and understand that they were making an online-only, multiplayer-only, DRM-laden game.
Vision can be communicated clearly, early, and unambiguously, and they didn't do that. Many of us have said unequivocally that if this had all started with the tagline, "Elite: MMO", we would've run the other way.
How many of us would've opened our wallets if Braben had stated originally that "an offline game is an empty game" and "cloud processing and always-online entertainment benefits everyone"?
They never really committed to or believed in the value of an offline Elite, and it's clear now that at every step it was the runt of the litter for their efforts, if even that.
"Do you now consider Elite: Dangerous to be an MMO?
Technically, it has always been."
They were disingenuous about the project from the beginning, and gave lip service to several things in order to secure a higher level of backing than if they'd come clean on their real motives at the onset.
This is so much worse than if they'd really just had to scale the project or postpone some features until a later release. People understand that aspect of game development.
I'm a 15yr veteran software developer (native platform, web, and server) and you don't suddenly discover that you've got a product that can't manifest without significant centralized rack resources and a persistent network connection. They knew with each day they developed that they were entrenching that into the game, and they did so purposefully and without transparency to us regarding the sacrificial consequences it was creating for other promised features."
"Well, there you have if folks. Newsletter #50 makes it painfully clear: "This whole issue comes down to what the vision is of the game we are making..."
Like I said: we entered into this with mutually incompatible visions of the game, we just didn't know it.
And: "Is offline mode an impossible problem, or just unfeasible?
It is a creative decision, not wanting to produce an empty game."
This was a choice, not an unavoidable consequence of technical or even budgetary constraints. Braben/FD *CHOSE* not to develop a game that matched the things they originally said which convinced us to give them our money.
Sure, they can mince words about it if they want, to shirk the moral obligation to provide refunds or any kind of recompense to those of us that didn't read between the lines and understand that they were making an online-only, multiplayer-only, DRM-laden game.
Vision can be communicated clearly, early, and unambiguously, and they didn't do that. Many of us have said unequivocally that if this had all started with the tagline, "Elite: MMO", we would've run the other way.
How many of us would've opened our wallets if Braben had stated originally that "an offline game is an empty game" and "cloud processing and always-online entertainment benefits everyone"?
They never really committed to or believed in the value of an offline Elite, and it's clear now that at every step it was the runt of the litter for their efforts, if even that.
"Do you now consider Elite: Dangerous to be an MMO?
Technically, it has always been."
They were disingenuous about the project from the beginning, and gave lip service to several things in order to secure a higher level of backing than if they'd come clean on their real motives at the onset.
This is so much worse than if they'd really just had to scale the project or postpone some features until a later release. People understand that aspect of game development.
I'm a 15yr veteran software developer (native platform, web, and server) and you don't suddenly discover that you've got a product that can't manifest without significant centralized rack resources and a persistent network connection. They knew with each day they developed that they were entrenching that into the game, and they did so purposefully and without transparency to us regarding the sacrificial consequences it was creating for other promised features."
Well, I've just read newsletter 50, and it just seems like a hastily rushed out exercise in damage limitation to prevent any awkward moments at the premiere event. Sadly, though, it doesn't say anything new. Braben hinted that there might be an offline mode at some point in the future, but that's all it was a hint, not even a vague promise
-
And I don't think refusing so many people their refunds is doing any good for the game either. It's just stoking their anger even further. I have this ominous feeling that this is not going to end well
Last edited:
For most people it isn't a problem at all. Solo (in other words not seeing another player) is what they want, and what they get. Again, a TINY amount of people really want to play solo and having nothing whatsoever change at all unless they change it. Being that they are one single pilot in an entire Galaxy, but nothing ever happens without them, of course.
You might be one of those very few people, and that's a shame, but there you go, it's done.
Well quite.
More than that, there are some really clever people in the DDF (I'm not one of them btw) who might, y'know, have been able to offer FD some useful suggestions and workarounds that might have kept everyone happy.
FD are a clever bunch too, but there isn't a topic in there where someone hasn't thought of a design hole or issue that FD themselves missed.
No, it is not. That is an extreme and completely overboard reaction... but I think you know that, and I think you know that most of those who object to this whole debacle are not like that. However he does have one small point - next time FD plan a release, with some features or other, and if the occasion should warrant someone pointing out this event... it is relevant and it wouldn't be bad-mouthing them to mention it... it will be history, form, fact!
Endless whiners, eh? Is that what we should call disgruntled customers who aren't going to receive what they paid for? In fact, is that what we should call all customers who buy things that aren't up to standard? If it wasn't for the "endless whinage" as you call it, there wouldn't be consumer rights that you, me and everyone take for granted.
No what's rubbish is superficial people with superficial replies. Those very few you so blithely dismiss are the final wave of backers that got the kickstart over the line - you know the people who made the game possible in the first place?????? - they wre promised and OFFLINE GAME reward for their support - OFFLINE NOT SOLO MODE. DB waited until the game was fully funded then reneged on that commitment.
Once and for time all those who PAID for an OFFLINE game got this game off the ground and are being scr#wed by DB refusing refunds. People like you who aren't affected and denigrate the 'few' are - well my opinion of your attitude simply isn't fit for publication anywhere.
Last edited:
So basically you are saying, we got your money and there is nothing you can do about it, sucks to be you. Is that about right?
I think you'll find that this description fits just about everyone who "grew up" on the original games. In other words, the very people who funded the game. Not all of course, and you're right that most people were / are excited for the multiplayer aspects of it - but at the back of everyone's mind at least was the promise of offline. To be able to play E: D like an updated version of FFE.
Basically, that's what we pledged for. It's why it was so important during the KS campaign.
Last edited:
I understand it perfectly well. I'm an old fogey myself. I simply disagree with that viewpoint, simple as that.
Yup, because people are totally not responsible for their own behaviour.
This some of the ugliest facets of humanity on display. Starting with FD. If they handled this situation like a reasonable company who cared what their backers and supporters wish we wouldn't be here... would we?
- Status