No Single Player offline Mode then?

[RGS]

I would say that a honest article by David with a heartfelt apology (both for what they did and how they communicated it) would not remove the pain but would at least somewhat ease the pain.

I agree with this - Particularly regarding how they communicated it (+ the very late timing too).

 

[Steve50]

The correct process they have stated is ask for a refund. People thinking of this should perhaps seek legal advice first as that money they pledged has been used to develop the game which will generate profits and had significantly more value at the time of pledge than it does now. A simple refund lets face it is the middle finger from FD.

I'm personally not asking for a refund but I'm worried about my friend, he paid £100 at the kickstarter for the collectors edition and he's got no home net. Now I've read that kickstarters can't get a refund and that I don't like. It's not his fault that he can't play the game, I also feel pretty guilty as I talked him into buying it, saying it would work fine offline. I hope he is allowed a refund.

 

[Juniper]

Probably not as the same issues would apply then as they do now.

Michael

Then you (Frontier) need to explain these issues clearly, succintly, publically, in a locked stickied thread that will leave nobody in any doubt whatsoever of where you stand on this.

This isn't going to go away I'm afraid like most other "topics of the week" have done.

People are not just annoyed or disappointed at the decision. They are angry and baying for blood. From many perspectives, you lied in order to get money out of people. The rest are just baiting them.

Please Michael, if you care about your game or the community that you NEED in order to make the launch & subsequent game a success, you (Frontier) need to acknowledge & address this.

Sticking your head in the sand and going "la la la" isn't going to cut it. Not this time.

 

[Demosthien]

Everyone that has been a kickstarter/alpha/beta are able to post here so logically anyone posting in this forum have been happily playing the game since their own pledge date,, the fact that you have all been playing proves that your internet connections are good enough to play the game, so what has changed with this no offline thing ? seeing as you have all been playing since pledge level, so you will still be able to play and have ( no people in your game ) with offline but connected to the server mode, and if you want both npcs AND people in your game you can have that as well, same as it is now in beta.

Really dont understand the panic and whining going on in here, ask for a refund if your unhappy.

You keep saying that everyone who backed it has been playing... All the while ignoring the large group of people out there who haven't been playing, but still pledged.

 

[jabokai]

And there's also


So it's more like which side you choose?

Nope, because directly following your quote it also says - "If a creator is absolutely unable to complete the project and fulfill rewards, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to a satisfying conclusion for their backers" - FD have clearly not done that.

 

[Skizomeuh]

The correct process they have stated is ask for a refund. People thinking of this should perhaps seek legal advice first as that money they pledged has been used to develop the game which will generate profits and had significantly more value at the time of pledge than it does now. A simple refund lets face it is the middle finger from FD.

You're joking, right? !

 

[Wyzak]

Yes but what now?
They stated that it became too difficult.
They stated they tried and it wouldn't work.
They stated it would mean to create another game.
What now?
Is it all about just an excuse by the developing team?
Is it to stand ones point, no matter what?
Asking the team to develop a singleplayer mode, even if it couldn't be financed, just for the sake of it?
Even after telling it would be dull or boring?
Just to experience exactly that?

I am angry as well, as i looked forward to and i don't like the feeling not being able to play what i want, when i want.
But i really don't get the point what so many are expecting from FD now.
You feel cheated? They offered a refund. What else can they do?

They could have been honest to us when they realised this, and not waited until a month before release in a 2 year development cycle to drop that bombshell. They knew about this months ago and should have communicated it then.

 

[SuBSynk]

I agree with this - Particularly regarding how they communicated it (+ the very late timing too).

Any heart felt apology probably dissipated with the threats, offensive remarks and other nastiness.

To be heart felt you need to feel that way and if i was DB -ofc negotiating another persons reality is impossible- i would hardly feel like making such an apology.

 

[tagos]

Yes we are living in 2014 now, we dont all own BBC and ZX spectrums anymore, we have the internet now, with amazing games coming out that work with todays technolgies, what a surprise

True. But on another game forum in a long-standing and enthusiastic ED thread there's at least 4 people who have changed their purchase decision on this news. And that's 4 out of 11 or 12 thread posters on a space-sim forum and a large % of those who were going to buy the game. some others are going to be asking for refunds. Frontier have our money - the game needs a constant stream of new income.

I might be wrong but I think the potential market for ED skews up the decades age-wise and they tend to want stand-alone options.

But it's not coming so all we can hope now is Frontier really solidly nails the net-code.

 

[Perrial]

I'm personally not asking for a refund but I'm worried about my friend, he paid £100 at the kickstarter for the collectors edition and he's got no home net. Now I've read that kickstarters can't get a refund and that I don't like. It's not his fault that he can't play the game, I also feel pretty guilty as I talked him into buying it, saying it would work fine offline. I hope he is allowed a refund.

Wherever money is involved there is legal recourse. Just because someone says you cannot get a refund doesn't mean it's true.

 

[Wyzak]

Sorry but that logic escapes me ... How can a static, never changing universe be more rich than a dynamic ever changing one? Even an offline galaxy will change over time anyway, due to the game itself. Whether that's because of human players or a computer algorithm makes no real difference.

If you don't like the fact others are influencing the galaxy, go to a place in the galaxy where there is very little influence, its not like its going to be hard to find some backwater place that nobody goes to.

Sometimes the actions of other players detract from your experience thereby making it less rich than the alternative. Secondary economies, grieving, etc come to mind.

 

[OriginalBadBoy]

It does not need concern anyone why people wanted an offline mode. It is about the fact FD said it would include one in the Kickstarter FAQ and now have dropped that.

So in essence every single backer should be absolutely disgusted by this then? The reality is they are not ...

Whilst its bad form for FD to drop offline, and the communication is poor, its happened, unless it actually affects whether you can play the game (as in you literally cannot without offline) then its just hot air and digital waving.

You can register your disgust with FD if you like, but it wont solve anything, and tbh if it doesn't affect you personally, register your disgust and move on. Its the fact that it is being made in to such a big deal that is causing the issue.

This reminds me of the Jonathan Ross / Russell Brand incident ... a few thousand people actually complained about it ... and then 20,000 people complained when they found out somebody else was offended and they were offended by that ...

 

[CMDR WelshSossy]

The decision to me personally is a blow, but I can still play, although I would have liked to have had both an 'online' save, and an 'offline' save for times when servers will be down etc. The decision I can live with (regretably), I am more dissapointed in the way it was handled and presented to us.

My biggest worry is that the netcode from what we have witnessed so far is simply not up to scratch. I hope that what we see in Thursday's 3.9 release will quash my fears. If the server performance issues are still as bad as what we have now, then I don't hold much hope for when the masses connect upon full release.

The game is clearly nowhere near finished in my eyes and is sadly being rushed out (making compromises) for a Xmas release. I will consider the game to still be in 'Beta' for another 6 months after the so called full release on 16th Dec.

I want ED to do well, as do we all. I hope the next few builds give us more hope that this game can survive (what I personally think) will be a very shaky start.

 

[Wyzak]

Earlier you were complaining about BAIT & SWITCH and threatening class action lawsuits.

Now you're talking about griefers.

Seriously this thread is beyond parody now, it's looped back through time and punched itself in the face.

So un-subscribe if you are so aggrieved. All of those are legitimate concerns with the lack of offline play.

 

[jabokai]

To be heart felt you need to feel that way and if i was DB -ofc negotiating another persons reality is impossible- i would hardly feel like making such an apology.

Really? You upset a significant portion of your backers - people you have publicly, on numerous occasions, cited as having been responsible for getting the game off the ground in the first place - and you don't think you'd feel like apologising to them at all? Let me know if you kickstart anything so's I don't back it!

 

[Pulse]

Good question but no. Not during a twenty minute dogfight, for example. ED is not a twitch game and the Devs have been clear that it's not.

I must be misunderstanding something, but in the build i'm playing right now - i'm able to log off during any point other than being in supercruise. I can alt+f4 out of the game anytime I wish.

The argument of 'what if I am needed urgently and I need to pause the game' - quite simply falls flat. If you're needed urgently a videogame does not take precedent.

 

[tagos]

This reminds me of the Jonathan Ross / Russell Brand incident ... a few thousand people actually complained about it ... and then 20,000 people complained when they found out somebody else was offended and they were offended by that ...

And then the company suspended them and changed the show format. I'm not sure that example is as supportive of your position as it could ideally be.

 

[Ericlas]

They could have been honest to us when they realised this, and not waited until a month before release in a 2 year development cycle to drop that bombshell. They knew about this months ago and should have communicated it then.

I get that as well, so feelings where hurt. Is it all about that?
After reading now for 20 or so pages, all i see is ppl asking for an official explanation or excuse and criticising the bad PR-work done by FD.
It's about broken promises and statements and the feeling to have been cheated.

 

[SalsaDMA]

Probably not as the same issues would apply then as they do now.

Michael

Considered 'offline mode' was quite possible in the elite I played on my c64 and later on on frontier on my amgia500, the fact that you seemingly have design issues now tells that you designed your software wrong.

It's that simple, really.

So was it incompentence that made you not realize the issue with your design WHILE YOU DESIGNED IT, or did you never intend for offline anyway?

Anyone with a background in software projects knows that block designs of what code is supposed to achieve doesn't magically happen by itself, but is carefully designed (as well as the interactions between blocks) before you start coding. Hence the 'design' aspect of software projects before you start coding. If you now state the design doesn't let you do what you promised, and you made the design yourself, it only really puts your company in a bad light, regardless of which way you try to polish it.

I've contacted you through my kickstarter backer pages 'contact' button in order to get my money back, cause I cannot see myself backing this kind of behaviour from anyone.

 

[Demosthien]

The decision was made so that we could focus on getting the game done and to match what we desired from the game - so of course we're continuing with work.

Michael

"...what we desired from the game..." (my emphasis)

Your KS backers paid money for what they desired from the game... If it wasn't what you desired it should never have been promised.

Leaving this announcement so late in the development process stinks of fraudulent behaviour.