Offline mode

[babelfisch]

That defense sounds like we should think of Frontier as (adjective) politicians. They say/said whatever people like to hear without giving it a real thought if they could do it, or even would do it. Is that it?

What some people don't understand is that game development is more complicated than they think. The explanation why offline mode didn't happen is pretty reasonable in my opinion.

If/when Frontier shuts down the servers one day, I don't think we'll get said data/tools to run private servers. That was said too long ago, things have changed. It will be just one more thing that never came to pass.

We don't know. It wasn't a promise in 2014 and it still isn't today, so it's nothing I can expect. If it happens I am happy, if not I am not unhappy. Expectation management based on facts rather than wishful thinking.

But Frontier deliberately made all those statements back in the day and happily cashed in on them. So I won't simply let them off the hook that easily and think they are accountable for those statements with regards to their reputation.

They delivered a pretty good game that still gets developed today. If anything most backers still owe them money.

 

[amigacooke]

What some people don't understand is that game development is more complicated than they think.

As most customers aren't game developers that's probably very true.

Sadly those who were game developers appear not to have understood how difficult game development is either and wrote lots of cheques that they were subsequently unable to cash.

 

[Old Duck]

They delivered a pretty good game that still gets developed today. If anything most backers still owe them money.

Maybe Frontier should be financed by taxes like the BBC.

 

[zimms]

[...] If anything most backers still owe them money.

Want me to fact check that statement?

I don't really understand that viewpoint though. You see nothing wrong with stuff like SC either for example? Developers can make the wildest claims (some might even say lies) that never come true while asking for money, and that's all fine as long as at least somebody says they are still happy with that alpha or whatever that currently is?

If Stigbob was here he would post his favorite article again, but that's not a one way street. How a lot of these gaming companies treat their customers isn't all that great either.

 

[Greasetrap42]

What is your opinion of the first three versions of Elite?

Many games in the 1980's and 90's were fantastic. +25 years ago. I fully appreciate the nostalgia value of great games from the past.

ED is not a game from the past, so nostalgia does not apply. Expectations have changed. ED is a great game but many of its features build off the multiplayer & shared persistant galaxy. As-is from Frontier I do not believe ED would be a fantastic offline single-player experience. Based on 2023 expectations. It would be a dry shallow game. If the game was heavily modified perhaps it would be good. But it does not have mods, and we have no indication that its even possible or feasible to have decent mods.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Maybe Frontier should be financed by taxes like the BBC.

You are aware that the BBC is financed by TV licencing, not taxes? (effectively a subscription) ( they also sell much of their self-produced content on the global market, to asssist in financing themselves.)

No, obviously not.

Yes, ED should be financed by a subscription, that would make it a resounding success...

 

[Greasetrap42]

You are aware that the BBC is financed by TV licencing, not taxes? (effectively a subscription)
No, obviously not.

I think in general money that gets collected by law and sent to the government is considered a tax. Regardless of who does the collecting and how the government decides to redistribute the money. Similar to subscrption fees many taxes are monthly or annual. Its usually assumed that the money collected will be distributed towards the service or activity it was collected for. Not always.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I think in general money that gets collected by law and sent to the government is considered a tax. Regardless of who does the collecting and how the government decides to redistribute the money. Similar to subscrption fees many taxes are monthly or annual. Its usually assumed that the money collected will be distributed towards the service or activity it was collected for. Not always.

Not quite as you infer...

What does your TV Licence fee pay for? - TV Licensing ™

Your TV Licence fee provides a wide range of TV, radio and online content for you to watch on your TV, mobile or tablet. Learn more here.

www.tvlicensing.co.uk

If you are interested, naturally.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Not quite as you infer...

I wasn't talking about what the money collected was being used for. The British television license fee is money collected by law. The BBC collects and enforces the fee and passes it on to the government for distribution. Some of that distribution will be back to the BBC. The fee is not specifically for watching BBC broadcasting. It is the collection of money mandated by law. It is absolutely a government tax.

I'm sure the BBC gets money from sources other than the government as well. Agreements with other broadcasters, merchandise, movies... etc.


I appologize for the for the off topic discussion.