There are currently 63 individual posters in that thread, though not all posts are related to requesting a refund. Was that the number you were referring to?
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
There are currently 63 individual posters in that thread, though not all posts are related to requesting a refund. Was that the number you were referring to?
That's the tricky thing. The download is as described. It just won't include a feature that was promised. But you bought the download as is, not as it was one day going to be in the future.
I already chatted to mine. He made a lot of wavy hands and "Get it away from me" noises. There's caselaw which supports the fact that kickstarter physical rewards are now legally binding and the fact that FDEV promised a DRM free version of the game puts them in a tricky position. By claiming the game is online only they're now in the trap of being between the kickstarter promise and the defined term of "Always online DRM", the only way they can get out of that is to strip the Singleplayer mode (Online Solo) from the game, in which case the game becomes a defined MMO. If they retain online solo, as a singleplayer game, it does have inherent tethered DRM, and that's going to open them up to consumer protection laws, as well as legal action via kickstarter.
That's the conundrum as it stands.
Wouldn't worry about that. Asteroid belts and planetary rings are huge and for gaming simulated purposes inexhaustible.
*raises hand*
Now, if a lot of people over on Star Citizen is saying you are silly to give up your Elite: Dangerous account, you know you should probably reconsider your position
http://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/2mimna/sold_my_elite_dangerous_account_what_is_a_good/
http://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/2mimna/sold_my_elite_dangerous_account_what_is_a_good/
We must...and I will.....and I really wait for the fantastic Gamma and the Release because FD/DB has said so....Everything is aweaome......all will fixed.
But I really hope they cut the Dogfight reason:
1.) Its not beginner friendly, and we didn'
t get enough F2P
2.) If you allways in Space in Dogfights you can,t see the ads
3.)Sorry folks it creates to much lag,so that player cant connect and see ads
only possible way will be fighting in ads arena....do agree..oh you have allready agree in T&C
So basically: make this an issue and the game loses even more features? What we defend against, we create...
Highly interesting, but that's where I have to bow out, lol. I can't say anything knowledgable on that, other than that I hear the sound of lawyers getting rich. If you're silent, you can actually hear it, far away in the background...
Vlodec
Banned
Thanks but I didn't really ask because I'm thinking of using the law, I'm not. I just wanted to ascertain how much of all this legal talk was just hot air.
And that has what to do with my post? Yep nothing. I was responding to a poster that was trying to state that FD have changed their refund policy in order to stop giving refunds in the last few days. He was wrong. You response has nothing to do with my post or the post I was responding too.
Refund denied.
I have insisted in my reply, on the grounds of false marketing.
I have insisted in my reply, on the grounds of false marketing.
David Braben has spoken about how scalable the Cobra engine is. What you see now is only what can be run on todays hardware.
If they decided to they could crank up the detail and the resolution, bringing our puny machines to their knees.
Well if any of that is accurate, no idea, one solution would seem to be take away solo and leave private groups.
Solo players then play in a group of one.
I was going to just post my (admittedly snarky
), Bruce Springsteen comment on this thread and leave it be as I'd kind of promised myself I'd stay away from the blood and teeth; but here I am, because I have an honest question for you.Let me preface this response with the fact that I entirely agree that the way it was communicated to the playerbase; that offline would be removed, wasn't the best way of communication. I also agree that if Offline meant that much to you, that a refund should be given in full.
Now with that out of the way, I want to address the legal part. Why exactly would you go down this route? The reason I ask is because I truly believe that David Braben and by extent, Frontier Developments, are not a nasty company. There have been no lies or deceit. At the end of the day, to get where they want to get to, that item has to go. Have your money back if you were relying on it. There are a lot of dubious companies out there, but I don't believe Frontier are one of them - and I am truly saddened if you think Frontier are deceptive, evil, and horrid. Because that's not the reality.
Should you want to go and do this legal action that you seem so assuredly bent on, may I just add that your ethos for doing so can have a profound affect across the world of people trying to deliver something awesome.
That is why I find this thread venomous. Not because legal action is right or wrong, or whether Frontiers' delivery was right or wrong, or whether the pulling of Offline is right or wrong.
Your immediate response, is legal action. Consumer laws. Let's SCREW THEM. Wow. Now, I'm not an idiot - I know why consumer laws are there and they're there for a good reason. To protect consumers. Good.
I TRULY believe this is not a case for chasing Frontier down. If you're that tied to the dollars you put down, then you shouldn't have put them down - least not because Kickstarter-funding is a grey legal area, and you might not even win.
Other than that, go ahead. Get your refund, and take legal action to get even more money you really shouldn't have - and let's just kill Frontier's creativity and vision. That's exactly what you want, no?
Isn't SC an always online game?
I've been chatting on and off with him about something unrelated that I've had to deal with over the last week, so I decided to borrow a bit of his time and ask him some questions after David's Q and A and get a lay of the land about this. He's said a lot of this isn't tested in court, so it would create precedents, but as far as he can see, the main contradiction right now is the existence of Online Solo. Whilst that exists, everyone who's arguing for a refund -has- a case, and FDEV -has- a problem to solve both in regards to kickstarter and in regards to consumer protection laws. If they remove Online Solo, the problems all go away, albeit in the worst possible manner for everyone involved, it makes the game an MMO, which changes the legal definitions around it, as then it also satisfies the technical definitions around the reward tier of a "DRM free copy of the game".
In other words, everyone gets what they want, but not how they wanted it.
That guy is nuts. He ditched ED because no offline and space feels empty and lifeless (no irony here) and promised specs changed. Then he buys into SC that is only online and in even earlier stages of development and thus even more based on promises.
- Status