Number of players is relevant if the universe is mostly reactive, any background activity is likely largely unaffected by the number of players(apart from the changes to the parameters they cause).
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Number of players is relevant if the universe is mostly reactive, any background activity is likely largely unaffected by the number of players(apart from the changes to the parameters they cause).
So far it seems like it's a lot more than "some", it's more like active denial of pretty much anyone who tries and with a copypasta answer to all involved. So, yes, it's quite valid.
The problem with multiplayer games that people invest in them. This means they will return to the one they have invested the most time. The most ardent supporters of the game are older dudes like myself. I do have "lots" of money I could burn on the game, but I won't. No cosmetics for me. I find them tedious. While I could have been convinced to buy an expansion but under no circumstance would I buy anything else. You would be surprised how strong this feeling is around my circles. I have only checked once to see how the paint jobs look like, and never since have I checked back, nor do I plan to do so.
The server cost are a major issue. Are you saying that I will be able to play with ED in 20 years like I play with the original Elite. You really think that there will be enough people playing to maintain their servers for a decade even? The average time anybody plays a given game is about 100 - 200 hours. And they will moderate the events happening in the universe. That sound like manpower to me.
By the way I absolutely agree with you that the average time for a single player game is longer than 2 years. Do you know why? Because it is a single player game.
I don't think he did apologise for no offline. He apologised for people being upset. People do this all the time when they feel they are in the right but feel the need to be apologetic.
Oh great, I leave for a couple hours and the man himself comes online to answer questions. Just my luck.
Anyway, I have to say I am disappointed with his answer to the main question, which was basically a slightly wordier version of what we already had the pleasure to read in the newsletter.
I know better than to pay in advance for a product by one of the big gaming corporations like EA or Activision, but I thought that an indie company, especially one headed by a legendary figure like David Braben would be more considerate towards its customer base. Well, lesson learned. I will never kickstart another project again, nor will I ever pre-order a game. And I know I'm not the only one.
Have it your way, FD, but know that you are alienating your most loyal supporters with this kind of attitude, the very people who, incidentally, were also the most likely to stick around and purchase any future expansions.
Anyway, I have to say I am disappointed with his answer to the main question, which was basically a slightly wordier version of what we already had the pleasure to read in the newsletter.
I know better than to pay in advance for a product by one of the big gaming corporations like EA or Activision, but I thought that an indie company, especially one headed by a legendary figure like David Braben would be more considerate towards its customer base. Well, lesson learned. I will never kickstart another project again, nor will I ever pre-order a game. And I know I'm not the only one.
Have it your way, FD, but know that you are alienating your most loyal supporters with this kind of attitude, the very people who, incidentally, were also the most likely to stick around and purchase any future expansions.
Please quote your evidence for the numbers you are suggesting in that statement.
Totally agree. That's exactly what he did.
Speak for yourself. I am a Kickstarter backer and don't feel alienated in the slightest so please, everybody for himself.
The success of that hinges on the 'what's DRM?' discussion... Earlier this year I have been involved in a very deep discussion about that on Steam. It was a discussion that barely deserved the name, but still some good points were made.
Is authenticating your game online DRM? Only when that answer is legally deposited, it's merely personal opinion. By my knowledge, the definition in the public domain is mainly in the hands of sunday-lawyers.
Well of course he feels he was in the right... that and the evidence no doubt presented to him by his staff is what he based his decision on.
Did I say anywhere in my post that all Kickstarter backers felt the same way? Did I even imply it?
No, and no.
So what both you mean is, he didn't say "I'm sorry I upset you, and because you've thrown a tantrum you get your way after all?"
That's just ridiculous.
How does KS define DRM ?
Physical version isn't a problem and there's no DRM in the game apart from requirement to login to the game server so I'm curious on what they'll do with that ... also since you bought a physical version you're much more likely to actually get refunded than any of the people who bought the digital edition from FD store
So can anyone login? Because if you need some sort of serial or passkey from FD, then that is DRM.
I'm currently looking at a Server:xx.xx.xx[unconnected] screen and can't start the game. This is why I wanted offline.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=60257 - Experiences are being provided in the thread, and everyone is coming back with similar stories. Happy reading.
I am certainly angry enough to waste alot more money on this, regardless of success chances.
I would have trusted him too before Friday, but now I don't, and that's my problem right now. The whole way this broken promise has been handled by FDev is truly disgusting and incredibly disrespectful to the fans who helped make the game happen. Braben and FDev should be showing more respect and remorse for the people who have supported them IMHO.
And as history has shown, a lack of trust with online games is a very bad thing. With regard to what Titus posted, Blizzard has a proven history of not only supporting their customers but being incredibly respectful and courteous to them. They also support their games for very long periods of time, hell Diablo II is still playable online 14 years after it's release.
I hope the game sells well for them, I really do, but they are not off to a great start with Elite Dangerous with all of this self inflicted drama and bad press. It could have all been easily avoided with some forethought and good PR choices. Or designing the game that the paying customers wanted, that would also have been a good choice.
Number of players is relevant if, like Frontier, you want them to "influence" the galaxy (even though, as I exposed in my excessively long and boring diatribe, it doesn't make sense for players to influence the galaxy, given their comparatively insignificant number); of course the resulting "dynamic" galaxy will be indistinguishable from a fully procedurally generated one that isn't influenced by players, which would be more efficient, but since Frontier's whole "VISION™" is for players to "influence" the galaxy, you either have to go with the first option, or lie.
Yes. But he can't apologize for the decision being made, since he thinks (and has to stand to it) that it was the right one (else he would have to reconsider).
Apologizing for the grief it caused is a thing he can do.
Oooops...
Don't get me wrong, i didn't call David a griefer!
In real life, the word has a real meaning
- Status