No Single Player offline Mode then?

[the darkwalker]

Even ignoring its legal implications, it dosn't look very generic to me ... pretty sure its about a game called Elite: Dangerous

i think i've found a caveat, right now they have
"internet connection required" under system requirements, someona care to take a look when this changed?
in the link that someone provided https://web.archive.org/web/2014062...aonce.net/elite-dangerous-standard-beta.html/
there are no clear system requirements, so e:d changed the contract on the go?

 

[-o-]

You know thats just part of a standard agreement right? and has nothing to do with this specific games features and only refers to ingame advertising across every game Frontier have ever made?

You honestly believe that the section of the current ED EULA which reads > "... you should only play the game when not connected to the internet", has nothing to do with playing offline?

 

[Namix]

technically it's wrong, in eu you can cancel the pre order up until the day before launch

I know that, i dont think anything i have said goes against that. My comment was merely stating that consumer law has specific times when it is applicable etc, right now pre launch it is not as FD are complying with the law by offering a system which allows a refund to be made.

Even ignoring its legal implications, it dosn't look very generic to me ... pretty sure its about a game called Elite: Dangerous

No company in the entire world pretty much makes up totally individual EULA's for every game they make, they have a standard template which they use for all games, if they need to add something specific for a title they will otherwise they leave everything in it as it is easier and offers extra protection again any future updates,changes. Basically its saying "if you dont want us to supply you with targeted advertising and have access to your computer in this way then dont be online", it has absolutely nothing to do with ED game modes.

 

[-o-]

i think i've found a caveat, right now they have
"internet connection required" under system requirements, someona care to take a look when this changed?
in the link that someone provided https://web.archive.org/web/2014062...aonce.net/elite-dangerous-standard-beta.html/
there are no clear system requirements, so e:d changed the contract on the go?

I raised a post about that when I noticed it in March 2014.

I've linked that thread it in this thread somewhere, so its been there since March at least.

 

[paralipsis]

I raised a post about that when I noticed it in March 2014.

I've linked that thread it in this thread somewhere, so its been there since March at least.

I think it could be argued that a reasonable person could assume that the requirement is there because when you are buying the game from a website, you'll need an internet connection to download it. The mere existence of that phrase on the store EULA doesn't negate the explicit and implied promises of not needing an internet connection outside of the game download and patches if playing offline

 

[-o-]

No company in the entire world pretty much makes up totally individual EULA's for every game they make, they have a standard template which they use for all games, if they need to add something specific for a title they will otherwise they leave everything in it as it is easier and offers extra protection again any future updates,changes. Basically its saying "if you dont want us to supply you with targeted advertising and have access to your computer in this way then dont be online", it has absolutely nothing to do with ED game modes.

So please tell, how exactly can a customer legally follow the game's own EULA if they do not want targeted advertising sent to their computer?

You realise you are arguing against FD's own EULA here, and not me. Are you suggesting that EULAs should be ignored because they are based on templates?

 

[the darkwalker]

I know that, i dont think anything i have said goes against that. My comment was merely stating that consumer law has specific times when it is applicable etc, right now pre launch it is not as FD are complying with the law by offering a system which allows a refund to be made.

i'm not attacking you, i just want to understand what to do whit this mess
i've read all of this and still i can't understand a single thing..

Specific information requirements apply when you buy digital content online, e.g. when downloading or streaming music or video. Before you make the purchase, you must also be informed how the content operates with relevant hardware/software (interoperability) and about its functionality, including whether any geographical restrictions apply to the use of the content and if private copies are allowed.


You also enjoy the right of withdrawal within 14 days from concluding the contract for online digital content. However, once you start downloading or streaming the content you may no longer withdraw from the purchase, provided that the trader has complied with his obligations. Specifically, the trader must first obtain your explicit agreement to the immediate download or streaming, and you must explicitly acknowledge that you lose your right to withdraw once the performance has started.
quoted from http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/shopping/buy-sell-online/rights-e-commerce/index_en.htm

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I think it could be argued that a reasonable person could assume that the requirement is there because when you are buying the game from a website, you'll need an internet connection to download it. The mere existence of that phrase on the store EULA doesn't negate the explicit and implied promises of not needing an internet connection outside of the game download and patches if playing offline

sorry but that's entirely wrong, i could have bought it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a gift

 

[-o-]

I think it could be argued that a reasonable person could assume that the requirement is there because when you are buying the game from a website, you'll need an internet connection to download it. The mere existence of that phrase on the store EULA doesn't negate the explicit and implied promises of not needing an internet connection outside of the game download and patches if playing offline

When I raised it in March, not one person stated that they believed there would be no offline version.

No comment was made by any FD rep, but thats understandable.

> Here < is the thread if you want to go through it.

 

[paralipsis]

sorry but that's entirely wrong, i could have bought it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a gift

Yes but one way or another you have to connect to the internet to download the game if you buy it from the FD store. It therefore doesn't follow that the only reason "internet connection is required" is in the EULA is because of always online. That's all I'm trying say.

 

[the darkwalker]

Yes but one way or another you have to connect to the internet to download the game if you buy it from the FD store. It therefore doesn't follow that the only reason "internet connection is required" is in the EULA is because of always online. That's all I'm trying say.

i could still download it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a DRM free box that came with the pledge...

also confirmed by a moderator again on march : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=13876&page=3
and yes i know that mods do work for free, but this is their forum and mis-information should be redacted (BY FD) to mitigate potential fuss...
of course we are here now lol

 

[Idiot Proof]

I am outraged by the removal of offline mode, I want my money back (120,00Euros) payed at early days

 

[mattensky]

i could still download it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a DRM free box that came with the pledge...

also confirmed by a moderator again on march : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=13876&page=3
and yes i know that mods do work for free, but this is their forum and mis-information should be redacted (BY FD) to mitigate potential fuss...
of course we are here now lol

I think you two are on the same side.

Edit: the side of the angels

 

[paralipsis]

i could still download it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a DRM free box that came with the pledge...

also confirmed by a moderator again on march : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=13876&page=3
and yes i know that mods do work for free, but this is their forum and mis-information should be redacted (BY FD) to mitigate potential fuss...
of course we are here now lol

I wholly agree with you. Let me restate it. I believe that the existence of the "internet connection is required" statement in the EULA needs to be there on the FD store, because you need to connect to the internet to download the game.

It therefore does not mean that it is there because you have to connect to the internet to install or run the game.

That is true now, of course, and it's why I have requested a refund. But the assertion that an internet connection is required is there because it's for the download version of the game.

 

[Fasty]

GameTrailers have picked it up in their latest video. That's pretty big, especially for a US site. http://youtu.be/GderSUzPYPo

 

[the darkwalker]

I wholly agree with you. Let me restate it. I believe that the existence of the "internet connection is required" statement in the EULA needs to be there on the FD store, because you need to connect to the internet to download the game.

It therefore does not mean that it is there because you have to connect to the internet to install or run the game.

That is true now, of course, and it's why I have requested a refund. But the assertion that an internet connection is required is there because it's for the download version of the game.

oh now i get you sorry but all this fighting these days made me really edgy xD
friendly fire!! hahah

 

[-o-]

i could still download it from my phone, my lybrary, my friend's house, or it could even be a DRM free box that came with the pledge...

also confirmed by a moderator again on march : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=13876&page=3
and yes i know that mods do work for free, but this is their forum and mis-information should be redacted (BY FD) to mitigate potential fuss...
of course we are here now lol

If you are referring to mis-information from anyone, including the mods in that particular thread from March, then I will have to say it was not mis-information.

Up until last Friday, he was providing accurate information.

 

[Dr Zachary Smith]

I await the "Oculus set to release at least 50 more dev kit variants before CV1" thread, it may actually be more of a threadnought than this one

 

[Namix]

So please tell, how exactly can a customer legally follow the game's own EULA if they do not want targeted advertising sent to their computer?

You realise you are arguing against FD's own EULA here, and not me. Are you suggesting that EULAs should be ignored because they are based on templates?

Simple, you don't play the game in this case. When you install any game you agree to its EULA/T&C, if you do not agree with those terms your not supposed to install the game (you ofcourse entitled to a refund if this is the case). If the game requires a net connection and has in-game advertising you have two choices....accept the advertising or don't install the game, that is how EULA's work.

 

[Greyshadow]

That is possibly true... but why do they flat out refuse to commit to releasing an offline version later? That would suggest that online will never be finished enough to offline it.

Because in the long run its just easier for them to pull it out completely. I mean no one here has any idea when this game will actually be finished could be 1 month could be 6 could be 1 year. If they scrap it completely like they did then to linger the possibility of offline ever coming out.

It also allow them to go with any Online model they wish to make more money, which if the games online component stays the way it is will fail horribly.

Either way this was a really bad move I mean i posted it earlier look at the issues that people will always have that are both present in open play and solo and if either of these issues happen to me after launch i will be even more upset then I am now.

Also this is beta is it not? If they ever were even working on an offline aspect then why have we not tested it? If the beta testers got to see and test this so called offline aspect themselves and see that it would not work this may have gone a whole lot better. Instead we have to listen to the devs say well it did exist but we are scrapping it because it does not work. And to be honest the devs will say whatever they are told to say and that does not have to be the truth as long as the public believes it.

 

[BladeVsNeo]

i think we need a lawyer here...for real.
this is too messy right now and FD's attitude with no clear communication is depressing at best.

we nedd to figure
1. Who is eligible of a refund, in which country and until when
2. We need to understand how much we could get refunded (ks backers deserve a full one? who bought in the store instead?)
3. We still do not know if fd is officially refunding anyone affected or not

radio silence is no good, no good at all

I'm 100% with you on this. This silence from FD and the generic replies is just rubbish.