Er, I think he meant that the people who get their refund actually leave, and not stick around complaining about everything and stirring up drama.
No Single Player offline Mode then?
- Thread starter Brandon31
- Start date
- Status
Er, I think he meant that the people who get their refund actually leave, and not stick around complaining about everything and stirring up drama.
I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about, we have been playing this game online for how long now, and an offline mode would only encompass a small amount of the overall game, why would you even want to play Elite, the little version.
I do agree that this should have been brought to the attention of fans earlier, but I do love how the same people who have made comments in the past like "David Braden is making the game he wants" are now upset he's not making the game you want, BTW an online only game isn't DRM, the game is connected to share data like the economy, again removing main features like that for an offline mode would be terrible, it could even lower the review score of the game, thus hurting sales, a half baked offline mode would help drop a few score points no doubt.
I bought the game to play the vision set out by FD, not so I could play all by myself without many features, or watered down versions of the features full online provides.
I do agree that this should have been brought to the attention of fans earlier, but I do love how the same people who have made comments in the past like "David Braden is making the game he wants" are now upset he's not making the game you want, BTW an online only game isn't DRM, the game is connected to share data like the economy, again removing main features like that for an offline mode would be terrible, it could even lower the review score of the game, thus hurting sales, a half baked offline mode would help drop a few score points no doubt.
I bought the game to play the vision set out by FD, not so I could play all by myself without many features, or watered down versions of the features full online provides.
More then enough... as long as FD is still in existens, as long as the servers are up and running, as long as the net code works as it should (BF4 anyone?), as long as my ISP provide a connection, as long as I'm in a location with Internet access, as long as I want every idiot in the galaxy messing up my game...
Indeed. I enjoy years old communities in Eve and EQ, I don' t need another online game.
I expected a game I could play when I dont have internet access, and that I could pause at will.
And I was willing to pay more for a game I knew I would be able to play for many years.
None of this is still true, and it was announced one month before launch almost as an aside... So perhaps we are overreacting, but not without reason I believe.
And you would never have to play otherwise, even if the promised offline was still actual.
What are you on about - are you taking "setup a server" to mean physical hardware?
Unless they were insane they would use a VM - in fact it is more than likely, especially as DB is aware of retro games and archiving, that anything supplied by Frontier would be a VM image - you don't want to find in 30 years installation depends on a random opensource library that was hosted on geocities
I posted this already, but I guess nobody is going through a 9000+ thread anymore:
Because,
- I can pause the game, when ever I want
- When I get back to the game after a week, the economics for a trade run might not have changed in real time
- I can play when connection is an issue
- When I play and get a nice time critical Mission , I don't get a "disconnect" and fail the mission, as it takes me minutes to get back in.
- I paid for the feature and like the original ELITE (singleplayer) feeling.
- I like to be able to train myself in flying, trading etc. offline, before I mess up my "Online" player. (Just accidently fired a weapon through a joystick config glitch inside a station. Now that is the end of my peaceful trader career, as I'm now wanted in FedSpace. Would be cool to play offline singleplayer and simply load the COMMANDER SAVED a few jumps before the mishap!)
- ...and the decision for buying into beta was mainly based on two features: I can play offline, with no internet connection at my own pace, and I can play online without lunatic human killers, waiting for me... the later was covered by Groups, now about offline mode?
Which one do you think you can pause and come back to the same state the next day? You haven'y understand a thing of over 9000 posts....
Yes but as the pointed out an archived snapshot would not be dynamic they have said that, and you don't need to calculate the whole galaxy at once only the part the single client is currently in at the level of detail they can currently see. That's what allows for such a large galaxy in the first place you don't store it all or calculate it all at once. Now with multiple clients obviously your server has to handle calculations for all of them at once. With only one client connected it should therefore scale down the processing needed.
What they are saying is the dynamic systems they use to collate the affects of all players and update the galaxy accordingly wouldn't work offline. I can see that it's kind of getting into the realms of big data. But we never expected the dynamic galaxy to be part of the offline experience and they never promised us that.
It may appear so yes, I have suggested they explain a little better as then it would make sense.
I'm not sure but I assume Frontier Developments are members of the Video Standards Council which is the UK regulator responsible for the Video Game industry (among other things). Given that their rules include
"Members will have a duty when dealing with their customers to trade legally, honestly, decently and truthfully."
While they may have traded legally they have not traded honestly, decently or indeed truthfully. If you have had a refund refused then talking to these guys may be a good move, while trading standards will be concerned primarily with the letter of the law you may find if enough people contact the regulator they would be prepared to put a little pressure on Frontier.
Find out more information including how to make a complaint via their website http://www.videostandards.org.uk/VSC/
"Members will have a duty when dealing with their customers to trade legally, honestly, decently and truthfully."
While they may have traded legally they have not traded honestly, decently or indeed truthfully. If you have had a refund refused then talking to these guys may be a good move, while trading standards will be concerned primarily with the letter of the law you may find if enough people contact the regulator they would be prepared to put a little pressure on Frontier.
Find out more information including how to make a complaint via their website http://www.videostandards.org.uk/VSC/
Children are so easy to satisfy. Getting philosophical while others take everything away from them. Or do you think its only a game, for what they betray you ?
So if one is just naive, he shouldnt call others degenerated.
And the video was ironic, you just did not understand it. So, instead of provoking, can you just shut up and going on subjugating yourself ?
We were not such washcloths tell ya. Women tell them what to do
My point exactly! Many Thanks
What are you on about - are you taking "setup a server" to mean physical hardware?
Unless they were insane they would use a VM - in fact it is more than likely, especially as DB is aware of retro games and archiving, that anything supplied by Frontier would be a VM image - you don't want to find in 30 years installation depends on a random opensource library that was hosted on geocities
You obviously don't see what I'm on about at all no. What I'm actually talking about is that it is entirely possible to have client server architecture and to run the client and server on the same machine be that machine virtual or physical is irrelevant to that point.
It’s a nice shortcut to create a VM Image and install that but then you are dependent on a third part to setup a server out of the goodness of their heart after Frontier fold the game.
You must have packaged your server side for initial deployment and installed it on a VMWare image before you can actually take the image with the software deployed for creating additional servers on demand anyway.
This question has been asked a few times (it's an obvious one after all =) but it's one that FD doesn't want to answer.
Which leads me to assume: not very high.
More like "EA forced a single player game to be online claiming (falsely) that most calculations were done serverside" and "FD forced a single player game with optional multiplayer aspects to be online claiming that most calculations were done serverside".
If you turn the logic on, servers with one client needs moonly fraction of processing power required by servers with tens of thousands of clients. So there is a high possibility we were not told truth.
That is what EA said,too. At least they didnt sell DRM free editions.
- Status