Elite: Dangerous Refund Policy

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you are one of the backers of Elite: Dangerous looking for a refund, Blue's News has all the info you are looking for.

The Elite: Dangerous Newsletter #50 outlines a refund policy for backers of Elite: Dangerous, following firestorm that resulted from the announcement in their previous newsletter that there will be no offline mode in the upcoming space combat game.
Click to expand...
 
HARDOCP thank you for posting I am one of the ALPHA backer and always been under the impression from Kickstarter that ED will have Offline version upon Official Release.
 
I made a pledge for 200 Pounds but have downloaded/played alpha but according to the news I am not eligible for a refund. But it also says " no yet pleayed the game are eligible for a refund" ; now are they talking about Alpha/Beta game or Official Released game which will happen in few more weeks.

Those who have pre-ordered an Elite: Dangerous release version from our online store and have therefore not yet played the game are eligible for a refund.
•Those who have already been playing the game online in the Alpha and/or Beta phases, regardless of whether they backed the project via Kickstarter or purchased access to Alpha and/or Beta through our online store, are not eligible for a refund.
 
And this is why I don't buy into kickstarters. Not even Star Citizen.
 
Good on them, but honestly paying for a game that doesn't even EXIST yet is even more retarded than preorders IMO. Good concepts will get venture capital to make if there is a market and a good reputation from the developer.
MCRAYGSX said:
I made a pledge for 200 Pounds but have downloaded/played alpha but according to the news I am not eligible for a refund.
Click to expand...
Pounds of what?
 
I think with any crowd-sourced product being developed, you have to assume that there is a risk of losing your initial investment. This is the world that venture capitalists live and play in. I'm not sure extrapolating that out across a diverse population is a good thing, especially when a lot of people will not put in the effort of researching a potential investment to the same degree that a venture capitalist would.
 
Ducman69 said:
Good on them, but honestly paying for a game that doesn't even EXIST yet is even more retarded than preorders IMO. Good concepts will get venture capital to make if there is a market and a good reputation from the developer.

Pounds of what?
Click to expand...

Cattle and sheep. Duh...
 
People who backed early should be treated with more respect as it was a early promise.
 
I am not sure they owe any backer a refund. Games change over the course of their development, so this is the risk you take when you decide to back a game or a project.

For those who are indeed pre-ordering, and have not played it yet, it makes sense because you can always cancel a pre-order before release.
 
Frontier and Braben have shot themselves in the foot with this, and badly if I might add. If they promised an offline single player game, then they should have delivered. They knew ages ago that they were going this route of single player game with an online DRM component, dynamic galaxy updates (or whatever description floats your boat) and they should have made clear that the game requires an internet connection as soon as they knew it would. Doing it this way is scummy and below them, it reeks of douchebaggery and it sets a precedent for Chris Roberts to exploit once the shit starts hitting the fan with StarCitizen and all the myrad of impossible promises they made...
 
I avoid Kickstarters and the hype around them (for my own sanity). Is the game itself good?
 
Ducman69 said:
Good on them, but honestly paying for a game that doesn't even EXIST yet is even more retarded than preorders IMO. Good concepts will get venture capital to make if there is a market and a good reputation from the developer.

Pounds of what?
Click to expand...

I do apologize for the confusion, I just heard about this morning and ignored the newsletter in my inbox.

http://i.imgur.com/FXTZnnj.png
 
This is a worrying trend with software, online activation or online required to play for single player games. The reason I hate this is what happens if I want to play one of these games in 10+ years time when the online servers are dead?
 
So the Alpha/Beta players are getting the green weenie of doom. This is why I don't do Kickstarter or other crowdfunding. The devs can take back/change anything/everything they want and still run down the street with all that $$$ in their pockets.
 
I was seriously considering picking this up, but no offline mode? What a joke.
 
MavericK96 said:
I was seriously considering picking this up, but no offline mode? What a joke.
Click to expand...

I was too honestly, it was sounding like an EVE Online game i could play by myself. It was in the purchase queue for the colder months this year, but not now.
 
This is exactly why most devs, even indie ones, need the "PR" team.

Anyone could ahve told them this wouldbackfire.

I don't get why they couldn't just have an offline mode? I'm sure there'd be PLENTY of people that would play it online (I know most people enjoy the online/interaction with REAL players more) but the simple fact they took out something that was promised is going to really piss off a LOT of people, even those who intended to play online an dnot offline.

It'd have been worth it to just include a barebones "offline" mode to not have to go through this and all the backlash, especially so close to release.
 
I've got a sad tidbit of information for those of you turned off by multiplayer.

Eventually, developers will realize the best DRM, is integrating online elements into the core game.

Whatever psychological issues hold you back from multiplayer would best be addressed, both for personal growth, and because it's an eventuality.
 
Kalabalana said:
I've got a sad tidbit of information for those of you turned off by multiplayer.

Eventually, developers will realize the best DRM, is integrating online elements into the core game.

Whatever psychological issues hold you back from multiplayer would best be addressed, both for personal growth, and because it's an eventuality.
Click to expand...

I can't fix my issues of players flying into my ship nudging it over and over and then typing "LOL" in the channel. I like the immersion that sometimes only a basic AI script is able to do better.

Also it really isn't because something is wrong with a person that they like to play a game by themselves, I spend most of my day surrounded by people and talking in the office, I enjoy a nice single player game here and there.

I do feel that publishers will be doing what you say in moving forward with online content, one reason for DRM and another is it does seem more players enjoy online play and the way to be successful is to please the majority not the minority.
 
Kalabalana said:
Whatever psychological issues hold you back from multiplayer would best be addressed, both for personal growth, and because it's an eventuality.
Click to expand...
Resistance is futile. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your computer will adapt to service us.
 
So did they or did they not have this as a listed feature in their original Kickstarter? I cannot find it on the KS page, and I did not think the KS creators had the ability to edit the main KS page after kickstarting has ended?
 
I am glad they are offering a refund to those who want one.

However, it must be said that the future of gaming lies not with the computing power you have on your desk, but with the enormous compute resource clusters of the "cloud" (I hate that term). This is going to be the only way for things to move forward in the future as we reach the limits of what consumer hardware in a single node setup is capable. of.

Embrace it or be left behind. ;)
 
SGalbincea said:
However, it must be said that the future of gaming lies not with the computing power you have on your desk, but with the enormous compute resource clusters of the "cloud" (I hate that term). This is going to be the only way for things to move forward in the future as we reach the limits of what consumer hardware in a single node setup is capable. of.

Embrace it or be left behind. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm curious about different tech like Square Enix's Shinra Cloud Engine, guess we'll see soon enough how they deal with latency.
 
Investing != Purchasing

If you invest in a start-up and it fails, you don't get a refund. If it goes a different way than they originally said, you don't get a refund. If it goes bankrupt, you don't get a refund. The whole point of investment is risk versus reward. When you back a game, you ARE NOT PURCHASING IT!

If you pre-order it, however, you are purchasing it. Distinct difference.

Don't get me wrong, I sympathize. It just seems like gamers don't understand basic economic principles.
 
Maxx said:
Investing != Purchasing

If you invest in a start-up and it fails, you don't get a refund. If it goes a different way than they originally said, you don't get a refund. If it goes bankrupt, you don't get a refund. The whole point of investment is risk versus reward. When you back a game, you ARE NOT PURCHASING IT!

If you pre-order it, however, you are purchasing it. Distinct difference.

Don't get me wrong, I sympathize. It just seems like gamers don't understand basic economic principles.
Click to expand...
But that's the stupid thing, when you're investing in them, you're not getting a return on your investment, you're just getting a video game. Thus its no different from a pre-order, except its even worse as the game may not even make it to market, yet alone be something you would have bought.
 
Ducman69 said:
Good on them, but honestly paying for a game that doesn't even EXIST yet is even more retarded than preorders IMO. Good concepts will get venture capital to make if there is a market and a good reputation from the developer.
Click to expand...

Just because some quality titles received investment doesnt mean all will. I'm sure there is a treasure trove of ideas out there that just never took off due to market forces actively working against them. The same way that people like Justin Bieber and Kristen Stewart can become stars, the entertainment industry has a history of manipulating "success". Heck, wasnt that how gamergate started? Reviewers colluding together to influence the industry as they saw fit?
 
Darunion said:
I was too honestly, it was sounding like an EVE Online game i could play by myself. It was in the purchase queue for the colder months this year, but not now.
Click to expand...

Same here, or otherwise put, an alternative to SC's persistent MMO universe.

It's now off my list. :(
 
Kalabalana said:
I've got a sad tidbit of information for those of you turned off by multiplayer.

Eventually, developers will realize the best DRM, is integrating online elements into the core game.

Whatever psychological issues hold you back from multiplayer would best be addressed, both for personal growth, and because it's an eventuality.
Click to expand...

You, sir, are a fool.

I have no psychological issues that hold me back from playing with REAL people.

It's a matter of preference to be able to play the game when I feel like it, on my terms, without the possibility of griefers, cheaters, loud-mouthed kids, loud-mouthed adolescent-adults, pay-to-winners, whiners, or ridiculous global chat going on about the latest fad to hit Twitter/Facebook/Imgur/Reddit/Pinterest/etc (i.e. the Social Media Hive Mind).
 
I am firmly in the camp that any money you throw at a Kickstarter game is purely because you want to support and never expect anything in return.

However, you can certainly say that when you are talking about video games there are a couple of core types. When you back a single player game... and then they tell you half way through it's not a single player game anymore...

Well now we are, even for software development, getting pretty close to having outright lied about what you were backing.

I mean "It's single player." then "It's multiplayer only."

That's REALLY BAD BUSINESS. No matter how you slice it. This will have ended up being less expensive for them in the long run to have just had limited offline play and said "we never said all features would work offline." Rather than this and axing it entirely.
 
If they did such a 180 turnaround, could potentially be a civil case. Business involves risk, but you can't solicit investment/donation for "We're going to build cars!" and turn around months later and say, "We took the money we told you we were building cars with, and instead built home furniture." That's misrepresentation.
 
I was feeling outraged until:

"David Braben explains that there will still be a single-player mode, that this doesn't make Elite: Dangerous an MMOG"

Oh. My computer is online pretty much 24/7 anyways, and if I really for some strange reason need an offline mode I will download the hacked executable that the pirates are using. No biggie.

Backed it shortly after the kickstarter, at the lowest level that still gets me the game. Been looking forward to this game for over 10 years, and combined with a commercial version Oculus and voice-recognition, I will live out my amiga-playing childhood dreams. Well, after a vidcard upgrade.
 
mavrocket said:
You, sir, are a fool.

I have no psychological issues that hold me back from playing with REAL people.

It's a matter of preference to be able to play the game when I feel like it, on my terms, without the possibility of griefers, cheaters, loud-mouthed kids, loud-mouthed adolescent-adults, pay-to-winners, whiners, or ridiculous global chat going on about the latest fad to hit Twitter/Facebook/Imgur/Reddit/Pinterest/etc (i.e. the Social Media Hive Mind).
Click to expand...

Just as long as you don't (I am not saying you have done so) do like many, many, many other "solo" players: become radical anti-social whiners in games and genres that were originally made for multiplayer. Elite is not an MMOG, so I am not talking about this case. But the entire MMOG industry was invaded by millions of anti-social singleplayers demanding, even though they had plenty of singleplayer games instead, that every released MMOG they started playing, and every in-development MMOG they started following, convert from a Massively Multiplayer Online Game into a Massively Singleplayer Online Game.

Ever since then, the MMOG industry has become completely stagnated, with exactly the same games being released over and over again to appease those anti-social extremists with the psychological issues that guy mentioned. Someone without those psychological issues who just wanted to have fun playing a game without others never would have even tried playing a MMOG nor demanding MMOGs cater to him/her as a singleplayer.

Now every single MMOG out there is a boring, anti-social treadmill or a completely broken/failed attempt at a sandbox, due to no funding/investment (as a result of the solo-player takeover of the market making it look like there is not a big enough market to short-sighted investors).
 
TastEPlasma said:
I was feeling outraged until:

"David Braben explains that there will still be a single-player mode, that this doesn't make Elite: Dangerous an MMOG"

Oh. My computer is online pretty much 24/7 anyways, and if I really for some strange reason need an offline mode I will download the hacked executable that the pirates are using. No biggie.

Backed it shortly after the kickstarter, at the lowest level that still gets me the game. Been looking forward to this game for over 10 years, and combined with a commercial version Oculus and voice-recognition, I will live out my amiga-playing childhood dreams. Well, after a vidcard upgrade.
Click to expand...

Yeah I am not seeing the big deal here. Single player, internet connection required for the in game universe to populate is how I see it.

Once it drops and all the details are out, I will consider it.
 
I got into this when Beta 2 came out. I think people are being outraged by the wrong thing. There's still a single player online mode, you can still have the whole galaxy to yourself. I know there are people who live in places with bad internet, but I suspect they are vastly outnumbered by the folks who have constant connections where cutting this feature doesn't really effect you. I saw one guy in the forums complaining that he was hoping to play this with his brand new X-55 Rhino and DK2 but no longer can b/c he spends most of his time at sea and there's no internet out there. Really? You're bringing your HOTAS and DK2 onto a ship?

That said, it's still poor form that they renege on their promise, especially this close to release. However, to my original point. It isn't the lack of an offline mode that will hurt the game. It's the lack of mission types and lack of life in the galaxy they've made. If you haven't played the game yet, you'll see. It only takes a couple hours to realize you've pretty much seen and done it all. For a game with 400 billion star systems, there sure is a whole lotta nothing to do.

If you've been on their forums before the offline topic completely took over you'll see a lot of posts from people worried about the lack of story and content. The best thing the apologists could come up with was, "You need to use your imagination to play this game of course! I pretend I'm Han Solo and......" or "Don't worry Frontier has tons and tons of content they've been holding back. I have no proof of this but...."

I'm kinda regretting my $75 spent, and not because of offline mode being cut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top