No Single Player offline Mode then?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Fighting between us customers on here really doesn't matter.

Most of the negative stuff I suspect is only happening as people feel Frontier as a company (not talking about the odd post by individuals on here) is not listening.

It's now gone 3pm and still no formal acknowledgement of the issue.

Simply bad customer service/awareness, if Frontier had taken ownership of this issue earlier today I'm sure things would have been a lot less frustrating..
 
Dude, I'm advocating an apology and the offer of full refunds and even I think you're going too far! :D

What you say may have some element of truth but it's almost impossible to quantify so the absolute best FD could do is offer refunds of the actual amounts.

Wherever money is concerned there are laws and financial recourse for actions taken. Offering a refund is a cheap way out and FD knows it. They will make lots of money off this thanks to people who invested in the development of the game. I am saying that they need to do a lot more for their upset long term backers who they have badly let down. Thank goodness for Exec Prod Michael posting as at least he is contributing to this thread.

FD as a company are liable for their decisions, taking money albeit with the best intentions to develop a game with lots of great sounding promises and delivering a game where parts promised are missing or swapped out is wrong, in-game features should never have a promise attached, a 'we will try our best to' or 'we will aim to make that work' should have been used instead of absolute guaranteed promises which ended up not being guaranteed. This has led to potentially a nasty legal problem. Terms such as obtaining money by deception and fraud have been bandied around and although very harsh those terms do apply.

FD need to step up and get their PR department into overdrive preferably with their legal guys advising them this time..., they also need to placate the current testers (i.e. us) and a few extra ships and reduced insurance costs are no alternative to those who are upset at no offline mode.

This whole thing feels like they have known for months and tried to sneak in the announcement hoping no-one would notice and I think that is the reason for a lot of upset. If FD had been up front and given prior notice letting us know months ago that it was looking uncertain then people would at least have been more prepared. A few weeks before launch has clearly left people reeling.
 
What are the definitive reasons for not allowing de-synched offline play and or run a limited local galaxy-server that can and will only ever service the offline single-player game?
I understand that E.D is designed from the ground up to be a far more dynamic system than previous Elite games but what are the actual reasons for enforcing online play?
Some other fairly recent games have 'died' because of GFWL (Games For Windows Live) ending its services.
I would like to enjoy E.D for possibly years to come, independant of my or the servers' internet connection.
 
To those of you complaining about this news coming seemingly late in the process, has it occurred to you that this decision may well come as a result of urgent changes made in recent days/weeks to address some of the performance issues that a significant proportion of testers had been reporting?

We have seen how quickly FD have moved in recent releases to try to find optimisations to the gameplay experience, and it could well be that this involved shifting more of the code's grunt work onto servers from the client, thus increasing the game's dependency on being played online...
 
To those of you complaining about this news coming seemingly late in the process, has it occurred to you that this decision may well come as a result of urgent changes made in recent days/weeks to address some of the performance issues that a significant proportion of testers had been reporting?

We have seen how quickly FD have moved in recent releases to try to find optimisations to the gameplay experience, and it could well be that this involved shifting more of the code's grunt work onto servers from the client, thus increasing the game's dependency on being played online...

Well said !
 
To those of you complaining about this news coming seemingly late in the process, has it occurred to you that this decision may well come as a result of urgent changes made in recent days/weeks to address some of the performance issues that a significant proportion of testers had been reporting?

No, because I'd expect them to mention that if it were true.
 
I wanted what David promised us. An Elite game that makes full use of the technology of the day.

That means making use of our connected world. A cloud server and P2P networked clients sharing the biggest sandbox ever made. If you don't feel like it, you never need to meet anybody else. If you want to play with friends, you can, if you want to share the sandbox with the greates possible number of people, jumping in couldn't be easier.

Some aspects of the past had to be let go to make this happen. We live in a glorious Sci-Fi future, and I'm glad Frontier have decided to put their effort into where it can do something truly ground breaking. There are plenty of single player games for passing time when the net is down. There is nothing like Elite Dangerous.
 
Nope, we still need an announcement about refunds. But thank you for helping to keep this thread growing!

That has nothing to do with the topic title and i kindly suggest you take it up with the store as has been previously stated several times by FD.
 
That was never the case. The intended play experience for the game has always been online. We had hoped to support offline in a cut down version as well, but that hasn't proved possible.

Michael

I think he was just talking about games in general. Not specifically referring to Elite.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom