I totally get that this lack of integrity would leave a sour taste in ones mouth. But would one actually get a refund, even though the lack of offline play wouldn't affect the experience (because of always on DSL, for example)? Is it just a matter of principle?
I can't speak for everyone, but I imagine it's also that the developers have broken the customer's trust. If they lied about offline, what else will they lie about? Will they deliver the complete game that was promised? I think it's highly unlikely.Originally Posted by Ser_Bunnylot
I totally get that this lack of integrity would leave a sour taste in ones mouth. But would one actually get a refund, even though the lack of offline play wouldn't affect the experience (because of always on DSL, for example)? Is it just a matter of principle?
And not everyone, even those in the big ol' USA, has reliable, always-on internet.
Last edited by StaggerLee; 21-11-2014 at 09:28 AM.
My ADSL went down last night... One doesn't always have internet when you go on holiday or when sitting at the airport.I totally get that this lack of integrity would leave a sour taste in ones mouth. But would one actually get a refund, even though the lack of offline play wouldn't affect the experience (because of always on DSL, for example)? Is it just a matter of principle?
I won't ask for a refund, but I can no longer in good faith promote this game as if nothing happened.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
Terms EULA section 8:
8. In-Game Advertising
The Game may incorporate technology (which may be provided by Frontier or third party service providers engaged by Frontier (each a "Dynamic Advertising Provider")) which enables advertising to be uploaded into the Game on your PC, and changed while the Game is being played on-line. In order that the Dynamic Advertising Provider is able to direct advertising appropriate to your Game and geographic region, as well as to the correct location within the computer game, certain non-personally identifiable data and information may be retrieved and retained by the Dynamic Advertising Provider including your I.P. address, geographic location, in-game position, and information concerning the appearance of advertising visible during your gameplay (for example, the length of time an item of advertising was visible, the dimensions of the advertisements). In addition, the Dynamic Advertising Provider may assign a unique identification number which is stored on your PC and which is used to monitor and calculate the number of views of dynamic advertising during gameplay. None of the information collected for this purpose including the identification number can be used to identify you.
The technology employed by Dynamic Advertising Providers may be located outside your country of residence (including outside of the European Union).
Where a Game incorporates dynamic advertising technology, the technology which serves the provision of dynamic in-game advertising is integrated within the Game. This means that if you do not want to receive dynamic advertising, you should only play the game when you are not connected to the Internet.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
/me adds not to get on Wyzak's bad side....ever.
Seriously, I agree, no matter the argument about online vs offline and how we are always connected, you deliver what you promised.
Like going to STEERS, ordering a burger, chips and coke, but getting no chips because the potatoes weren't delivered and the cashier didn't say anything...
- - - - - - - - - - Double Post Merged - - - - - - - - - -
/me adds not to get on Wyzak's bad side....ever.
Seriously, I agree, no matter the argument about online vs offline and how we are always connected, you deliver what you promised.
Like going to STEERS, ordering a burger, chips and coke, but getting no chips because the potatoes weren't delivered and the cashier didn't say anything...
Kekekeke. Just noticed my signature also applies to this situation.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
The plot thickens, read this article on how David Braben feels about "the pre-owned problem".
http://www.frontier.co.uk/features/f...eNum=1&blk=214
Ahem!6. Move to online-only. This is where the retailers seem to want us to go after all, so perhaps it’s time to make the jump.
Also his opinion on ownership:
http://www.frontier.co.uk/features/f...eNum=1&blk=214
I think the water is under the bridge... can't see myself supporting him again. Not unless the game is truly offline and already in the shops.A game is an item and a service too, except there are people out there trying actively to prevent publishers and developers detecting whether a game is new or has been sold again. The equivalent is adjusting the paperwork and registration number on your second hand car to get a new warranty and free maintenance out of your garage. We see shops using polishing machines on used game discs, and even replacing the outer sleeve to make a scratched game look new. With a game, the service is a combination of the single player game and online support. Online bandwidth per user is something that gradually dies down after a game is some months old – but if it is then passed to another user, those costs are incurred all over again for the new user – but the publishers providing the service see none of the ‘pre-owned’ revenue to cover it.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
Can remember seeing a documentary about the first Elite games, and how he basically invented one of the most draconian and first means of copy protection.
My post on their forums got canned - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...49#post1052649
Stupid reasoning though, David's opinion on second-hand games and ownership doesn't directly apply to the link that I was referred to.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
So gamma went live last night which allows all kickstarter backers to start playing the game and guess what... their servers crashed.
from http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=...&id=6b99a1d038Are you confident the servers will be stable come launch day?
Yes, as confident as we can be, because we have been testing our servers throughout the development process, and continue to do so. Our servers are the same ones that Amazon uses, and can (and have) scaled up quickly to deal with demand when needed.
When an anti-piracy method is affecting the game for people who legitimately bought it and causing other people not to buy the game, there is obviously something wrong with it!
Posting Permissions
