No Single Player offline Mode then?

[Jonbe54]

Hmmm Limit Theory has possibilities but I'm not sure about building space stations and planning raids etc., . . . I'm a lone wolf - as a commander and deep down at heart in real life, I want to get out there and do my own thing in my own time.

If I want a building sim I'll use Sim City or perhaps the luscious Civ V, I just want to get out there in the space lanes and do my stuff MY way.

THAT is how the original ELITE was concieved and implemented and what caused me to fall in love with it and the wonder it presented.

 

[poet1960]

Whilst I cant agree with you about this...



This is about as true as a statement can get, the kid has massive skills, hell Chris Roberts tried to hire him and lol Josh turned him down!

Smart move on Josh's part.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Most people are not aware of this... the KS page is starting to pick up with complaints and they have not posted there in few days.

And not all of them care about offline mode

Even if they had polled (and my understanding as KS backer was that there was no obligation in their part to ask for my opinion), the majority might still have come down on the side of ditching the offline mode in favour of game depth and complexity --as indeed they appear to have done. So it wouldn't have changed anything.



I think that you are morally entitled to a refund, but sadly that's all you're entitled to.

Ok after doing the math so far.....Individually there are 1054 individual posters on this thread.....
Assuming they are all unhappy ( although they are not all )

That would be 1054 unhappy backers against 24,000 happy ones.....Big thread but not really so many people

 

[Diamond Dog]

He's probably due another one, but I assume you missed the last one on the 6th October.

Give the guy a break though. He's doing it all single handed, and basically been working 7 days a week, 12+ hours a day on this, with only a couple of weeks off last August. I think he's doing an amazing job with the updates all things considered.

Anyway, yes, back to WW3 and the four horsemen...

I did! Thanks for the link =)

 

[Gingerwig]

I can't see it like that, sure if all was linear and equal, but it won't be, there will be certain paths that limit the number of options, also the galaxy isn't a sphere it is a slightly blobby disc but essentially a disc. You are correct that eventually I will pass the limits of the other 10,000+ or so explorers but by your own maths we are talking years for an always on player, for me I doubt I'd find anything unexplored before about 2150 and I am not confident that the servers will still be online then regardless of what FD say about it.

Again, sorry but maths says you are wrong.

There are not many stars you can't get to with a cobra and you certainly wouldn't be going deep space exploring with anything less. You are right in that the disc is more or less flat but that disc at it's thinnest is about 1000 light years across. Considering jumps between stars are approximately 5 and 10 light years apart the sphere model still fits well.

I'm not trying to nit pick with you, I'm just trying to point out that some of the reasons people are giving for not wanting the online solo mode are not relevant...

...that's not to say there aren't relevant reasons to be ****** with the recent announcement because there are. I just don't think not being able to keep up with people who can play more than you is one of them...and I fit into the category of not being able to play as much as I would like.

 

[Tinman]

My dashboard reads just a little short of 100k

More than 140.000 backers currently...

http://www.frontier.co.uk/investor_relations/reports/news/?artid=465&pageNum=0&blk=275

 

[poet1960]

Hmmm Limit Theory has possibilities but I'm not sure about building space stations and planning raids etc., . . . I'm a lone wolf - as a commander and deep down at heart in real life, I want to get out there and do my own thing in my own time.

If I want a building sim I'll use Sim City or perhaps the luscious Civ V, I just want to get out there in the space lanes and do my stuff MY way.

THAT is how the original ELITE was concieved and implemented and what caused me to fall in love with it and the wonder it presented.

LT is pretty much a sandbox PG world. Do what you want when you want. You won't be forced into any kind of play.

 

[moonsword]

I think that we do not understand each other. If developer after being explicitely asked confirms that game is going to be playable as standalone. And continues to market it (for whatever reasons). And then they said that they do not like "emptiness" of standalone but they'll be doing it anyway. And backers say that they do want exactly that - "empty" standalone version. And then developers scrapp standalone version and redirect the money of the people who want standalone version into something else. after stating that they could developed standalone version but they do not want to.

don't know about you, but I can se a major problem here. that includes problem with communicating and treating customers. Dishonesty. and some other ethically very questionable stuff.

Well "And backers say that they do want exactly that - "empty" standalone version." is something I would not wanted... I wanted a game that I am able to play offline BUT that changes dynamically. Please don't say that backers (would guess you ment "all backers") wanted a static OFFLINE ED. That is not true. I guess I am not the only one who expected a dynamically changing OFFLINE version.

Now I had being told that this requirement is not technical feasible but all the other stuff gets delivered that was promised.

And this is the point.. because of technical reasons they were forced to decline that feature... that may happen!
That is what may happen in every project... and also does.

For me 95% of my expectations are reached for others (I would expect not many) less or far less.
Should I say now. "Give me back 5% of what I had paied you!"?

That is what I, as someone who has invested some hundred pounds in the development of a product had to reckon with!
If FD continues to deliver the features they promised... they reach the 100% for me or even more than that.

Sorry to say that I feel this screaming of some backers (not many) is really irritaiting.... screaming because they do not get the Porsche they had expected, but receiving a Mercedes.
But I am feeling sorry for those who are thinking of receiving a Fiat Panda now!

But as I said... that is the risk you have to live with if you are investing into the development of a complex product.. that's live..

 

[DaveS1]

I alreqady told him this.


I am wondering how many people confuse no-offline with no single player?


quite an amount I suppose.

We already know the difference and it is quite significant. If I may?

In Offline mode: I stop playing at a point in time at which commodity X costs Y credits at system 1 and sells for Z credits at system 2. Systems 1-100 have been explored and I am getting news on them. Systems 1-50 "belong" to the Empire and there is a reward of 1 meeeeeeeeeelion credits for bounty hunting the Dread Pirate Roberts in system 69.

2 weeks later I go back and everything is the same as when I left it. My cargo hold full of X is a sound investment, my allegiances aren't suddenly biting me and I think I'll have a gun for Roberts and then explore systems 101-110

However, in online Solo (dynamically affected by other players) if I leave at the same point as above, when I come back in 2 weeks:
I am now in a system that belongs to someone I have upset, Roberts is well dead, systems 1-100000 are now explored and my cargo hold full of X is worth half what I paid for it. And as a casual player I have to start learning about trade routes, allegiances, politics etc. all over again because they bear no resemblance to last time I played the game.

 

[-c-s-]

I alreqady told him this.


I am wondering how many people confuse no-offline with no single player?


quite an amount I suppose.

Perhaps there is another explanation.

That you are confusing solo with single-player. The "solo" experience, as it is being described, is a projection of the multiplayer world -- that is 180 degrees in the opposite direction from offline single-player.

 

[stephen_usher]

Newsletter #50 response.

If only Newsletter #49 had never happened...

If the announcement of the loss of off-line mode had been given in the way that it has been done in Newsletter #50 then I'm sure a great deal (but not all) of the anger would not have happened. At least it felt in the latest newsletter that there was a degree of respect for the backers, which was sorely lacking from #49.

I really feel for those who can't play solo on-line and those who feel cheated.

I must admit that the policy on refunds is misguided and will only result in more anguish and bad press. Even if it were a refund of the final game price it would be at least consistent across the board and probably affordable too.

 

[Juniper]

Again FD should have thought about this before spitting in the face of their supporters and then refusing to issue refunds. Do I believe it would be classless for people to make issues there YES but it is no less classless what FD is doing right now!!!! With the back to the wall approach you NEVER know what peeps will do!

Perhaps, but I think the vast majority of people there will just be happy to be there & have a free pass to get away from their day jobs / wives / partners and geek out amongst other geeks. And that's even if they care about the offline issue.

I doubt very much FD will have to hire extra security or body guards.

 

[Brodie]

I cut'n pasted the same text amongst others when i reported Frontier to Kickstarter. It probably won't provide any pressure at all, but might help Kickstarter prevent companies deliberately misleading the backers with false promises - like in this case.

This is simply not the case, seriously come on, all sensationalism aside here, you would have to be properly wrap around sleves jacket, padded wallpaper paranoid to actually think Frontier DELIBERATELY set out with the intention to mislead people.
Sure they promises a mode which sadly, and i do me sadly, where unable to deliver upon, but I fully believe that Frontier as just as gutted as the genuinely small number of people who have a legit problem with getting a 4kpm connection every once in a while.

Jeez some people just love to ring a bell to get attention!

 

[synchromesh]

Most people are not aware of this... the KS page is starting to pick up with complaints and they have not posted there in few days.

That's true...I also just found out the only the kickstarter had 25,000 backers...Its now 140,000....
So you could get more on the way....or this could be it ?

 

[stephen_usher]

This is simply not the case, seriously come on, all sensationalism aside here, you would have to be properly wrap around sleves jacket, padded wallpaper paranoid to actually think Frontier DELIBERATELY set out with the intention to mislead people.
Sure they promises a mode which sadly, and i do me sadly, where unable to deliver upon, but I fully believe that Frontier as just as gutted as the genuinely small number of people who have a legit problem with getting a 4kpm connection every once in a while.

Never put down to malice that which can be explained by shear incompetence.

 

[ArchAngel.]

Imagine the #ShirtStorm when Star Citizen fails to deliver...

 

[synchromesh]

This is simply not the case, seriously come on, all sensationalism aside here, you would have to be properly wrap around sleves jacket, padded wallpaper paranoid to actually think Frontier DELIBERATELY set out with the intention to mislead people.
Sure they promises a mode which sadly, and i do me sadly, where unable to deliver upon, but I fully believe that Frontier as just as gutted as the genuinely small number of people who have a legit problem with getting a 4kpm connection every once in a while.

Jeez some people just love to ring a bell to get attention!

Agreed....2 options..
They left it till last minute to really cheese you off...
Or they really tried till the last minute ?

 

[DaveS1]

Ok after doing the math so far.....Individually there are 1054 individual posters on this thread.....
Assuming they are all unhappy ( although they are not all )

That would be 1054 unhappy backers against 24,000 happy ones.....Big thread but not really so many people

Your maths is flawed on so many levels. Firstly I make it 1086 unique posters, but I accept my maths may be slightly less than accurate, however without examining each poster's intent we have no idea how many are happy, unhappy or neutral. Secondly, there may be 24,000 backers but until they all post we can assume absolutely nothing about their state of happiness. you have no data to assume anything at all about those who have not made their position clear, other than that they have not made their position clear.

If you want to extrapolate data you need to identify the 1000+ posters and then categorise them as happy, unhappy, neutral and give stats on that. You can look at it as a challenging and rewarding projectette.....

 

[Brodie]

Never put down to malice that which can be explained by shear incompetence.

You have a fair argument with incompetence, not a solid one though, but deceit like some people here are raving about is just bloody ridiculous!

 

[Zuikaku]

Well "And backers say that they do want exactly that - "empty" standalone version." is something I would not wanted... I wanted a game that I am able to play offline BUT that changes dynamically. Please don't say that backers (would guess you ment "all backers") wanted a static OFFLINE ED. That is not true. I guess I am not the only one who expected a dynamically changing OFFLINE version.

Now I had being told that this requirement is not technical feasible but all the other stuff gets delivered that was promised.

And this is the point.. because of technical reasons they were force to decline that feature... that may happen!
That is what may happen in every project... and also does.

For me 95% of my expectations are reached for others (I would expect not many) less or far less.
Should I say now. "Give me back 5% of what I had paied you!"

That is what I as someone who has invested something in the development of something that I had to reckon with!

If FD continues to deliver the features they proimised... they reach the 100% for me or even more than that.

We were promiseddynamic offline galaxy. After they started talking about problems we have all lowered the bar and I personally woul'd be quite happy even with frontier like static galaxy. Not ideal but far better than nothing. and as FDs stated, they are quite capable of doing that, but that is just not the "vision". Well, sorry, the problem ishey shoul'd tell us thatt 2 years ago and not luring us into backing by stories about dynamic single player offline galaxy!

Believe it or not, that was one of major features why I have backed the project (exept the ona that this is Elite after all - but is online only Elite really the Elite?)!