No you can still get it and the 84-version is happily running as a background process right now ^^ The ZX48 version appears to be a direct port. I love the original manual for it too. It brings back awesome nostalgia feels. Thay don't make them like that anymore!
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
No you can still get it and the 84-version is happily running as a background process right now ^^ The ZX48 version appears to be a direct port. I love the original manual for it too. It brings back awesome nostalgia feels. Thay don't make them like that anymore!
I read all 36 of Mike's posts in this thread and what he says allows me to easily understand how they made the mistake of stating they would be including offline mode.
If you read every single one and don't conclude he's lying through his teeth, it's all sensible, realistic, possible and very much human.
I don't wish to repeat what he said - again - but I think it's important those who think he's lying, despite reading them all, take a deep breath and a step back.
Everything he said makes sense. It explains everything. If he is lying, it's a more elaborate deceit than I'd give any developer credit for.
I totally understand feeling sad at the news; it's just not helping anyone to insist there's a nefarious intent behind the decision.
If you read every single one and don't conclude he's lying through his teeth, it's all sensible, realistic, possible and very much human.
I don't wish to repeat what he said - again - but I think it's important those who think he's lying, despite reading them all, take a deep breath and a step back.
Everything he said makes sense. It explains everything. If he is lying, it's a more elaborate deceit than I'd give any developer credit for.
I totally understand feeling sad at the news; it's just not helping anyone to insist there's a nefarious intent behind the decision.
Last edited:
They did not wait to the last minute, it was decided all along beta, again guys why do you think there was never an interest in testing an offline game mode?. Sadly we were more faithful to frontier than we should have, I'm sorry but even Michael's answers point to a "you should have known this all along"
I don't know where you getting your pricing from but mid-west US and canada do not have very cheap data only 1GB plans not to mention coverage is still an issue for cellphone data especially in hotels. On my provider your looking at 30$ for 1GB on top of an existing plan with no data only option. I know that in Asia I can get unlimited LTE for 20$ a month pre-paid or less but even then coverage is very spotty due to urban cover. Once you get a degraded connection to 3G or worse your latency is going to skyrocket.
"you should have known this all along"
That will be first thing I'll say to you when I find you QQing come the 22nd.
I read all 36 Mike's posts, and he does not say why we cannot host our own servers.
You can still grab it from Ian Bell's website. Ian being the other original creator of Elite.
http://www.iancgbell.clara.net/elite/game.htm
I read his posts and it sounds like Sim City (5) Disaster Watch all over again just before release. Servers do matchmaking, statistics, anti-cheat, DRM, market updates, trading, zone updates, and so on in both games. All of these things can be done client side but cheat detection and client file validation is lost which in offline mode are not needed anyways.
No, he said it quite clearly (and frankly that was hole reason for me doubting offline mode in first place). You can't build two games like that, you just can't. Either online suffers, or offline goes.
That's the problem with the current monopoly system that exists in USA, Canada and Australia i think, here were i live, a so called 3rd world country, every dsl or cable plan is unlimited and i can get a 50gb, 50mbit LTE plan for $50/month with unlimited downloads from 12am-7am, something like that in the US i think would cost over $150, for us this is a product of competition where we have around 3 alternatives to the biggest carrier, don't like it? get your service from another, and it works beautifully.
I just wish to go on record that I do not like the "no offline mode" change to the game at all.
I am regularly without internet connection. Nothing I can do about it. It would be less of an issue if this game had been offered as an online only game from the beginning, but since this is the first time I personally hear about the offline mode being dropped I'm a bit concerned. I wouldn't have pledged nearly as much for an online only game, that's for sure.
Frankly, this sucks.
I've been a backer since fairly early on, adding to my pledge whenever I could. I never saw a need to make a forum account... it saddens me that the first post on this forum is something of this nature.
I am regularly without internet connection. Nothing I can do about it. It would be less of an issue if this game had been offered as an online only game from the beginning, but since this is the first time I personally hear about the offline mode being dropped I'm a bit concerned. I wouldn't have pledged nearly as much for an online only game, that's for sure.
Frankly, this sucks.
I've been a backer since fairly early on, adding to my pledge whenever I could. I never saw a need to make a forum account... it saddens me that the first post on this forum is something of this nature.
Simcity was advertised as single player game during preordering time. ED has been advertised as primarly as multiplayer game since day one.
Yes, he does.
That would require giving the server code to the public.
He didn't need to go into more detail than that. There are several reasons they wouldn't want to do that. One is it would grant access to the public all if the secret data in the game. Another, a direct risk of the aforementioned, is it would result in security risks for players.
There are more. The first one is enough. That is not an option.
He said offline could only work under two scenarios. Neither is practical. Cutting offline was the only option left.
I believe him. I see no reason not to. None. Including the belief that he's lying or covering up mal-intent.
Actually, we knew the entire time that online was originally supposed to be the intended single player experience, and that the galaxy was supposed to be maintained on the central server. We knew it from the get go, from the Kickstarter at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous#project_faq_43734 :
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. The above is the intended single player experience.
It was originally intended, prior to the Kickstarter, that this was going to be an online game. It wasn't until after the Kickstarter had already started that they opted to also offer fully offline as an option. As Michael said, at the time, they thought it would work. Well, it doesn't. That doesn't mean they failed to act in good faith.
For what you say to be true, you have to conclude that the deception went all the way back to the Kickstarter. That they knew right then and there it wouldn't work offline ever. And that somehow they continued to promote the feature through the end of 2012, all the way through 2013, and all the way through mid-October 2014 knowing it was all a hoax. And that there was no effort the entire time at the company to implement the feature. And that nobody at the company who knew it was a fraud had a shred of integrity to resign and tell anybody.
It's outlandish.
I understand your anger, and I truly am saddened that so many of you will not be able to enjoy the game now, which I have found to be incredible so far. And I worry about the long term of whether my son will be able to play it with his kids one day 30 years from now the way we are.
As an aside, consider the inevitable, negative media reporting to follow on this. Was that all a part of Frontier's master plan, too? To disappoint so many people on the eve of launch? How does that draw in more customers? The risks of crowdfunding an unfinished product are a controversial issue nowadays. This will surely be used as an example of what might go wrong if you promise more than you can deliver.
For what you suggest to be the truth, you have to believe they pre-planned the above scenario, with all its dramatic, highly negative outcomes. It's a publicly traded company. How do you think the stock price might fare? Was that all a part of Frontier's plan to make riches, too? They've got everything riding on this game. To suggest all this was all pre-planned defies all reason.
Last edited:
It's odd to me, all the posts about, "the only reason I backed was for offline mode."
I backed because of internet spaceships.
I backed because of internet spaceships.
Strange how this has exploded, the game itself is turning out to be very good, and the p2p concept might just be a work of genius
With over 3000 replies to this thread the answer is sadly 'yes'
Yoda "unsubscribe me comments your thoughts are read maybe"
No, he clearly said that they can't hand out private servers because it is practically huge cheat/insider list for all stuff you can find in online galaxy. On that basis alone FD shouldn't really cave in during Kickstarter.
- Status