Elite: Dangerous - Backlash Over Online-Only Emphasis

You do realize it was Ubisoft who didn't give you a refund, and not Limbic? I do think it was a crappy move, even though I really like the game.

Originally Posted by forgottenlor
You do realize it was Ubisoft who didn't give you a refund, and not Limbic? I do think it was a crappy move, even though I really like the game.

I wasn't too worried about a refund, the amount wasn't huge, it was what they {Limbic} did that pissed me off.
I'm glad you enjoyed the game, that was what I wanted in the long run.

Originally Posted by figment
I The only good thing is I did not download or play any alpha or beta so that may improve my chances.

They crossed the bridge: "playing" an alpha or a beta version is playing the gold version of the game.

As alpha and beta accesses were monetized, they show no fear.

Remember folks, no game exists that's worth having either the Ubi platform or Origin on your PC…..imo. Don't hate on your computer like that. =xxxx

Originally Posted by Carnifex
Remember folks, no game exists that's worth having either the Ubi platform or Origin on your PC…..imo. Don't hate on your computer like that. =xxxx

I have 32 GB of RAM, I don't care. I prefer there are many different platforms than to let Steam get all the leverage. I'm glad to see people telling Steam to piss off.

They're all unwelcome and peremptory crapware as far as I'm concerned. Praise be to GOG!

An interesting article from Elite studio head, David Braben, on the subject of combating the trade in pre-owned games:

https://www.frontier.co.uk/features/…eNum=1&blk=214

Hmmm…

Link to that article should be posted every time Frontier tries to come up with an innocent explanation for the bait and switch!

Wasn't really unexpected and I am completely fine with that. But they should have stated it right away as a game design which requires online-only doesn't appear overnight.

Still happy with my pledge and lifetime pass.

Originally Posted by Kordanor
Wasn't really unexpected and I am completely fine with that. But they should have stated it right away as a game design which requires online-only doesn't appear overnight.

Still happy with my pledge and lifetime pass.

I have beta access….not shocked by the move. They did come out and state that they kept trying to get it to work but felt that they would have to give up to much to make it work.

Not a huge deal to me.

It is a steel trap.
Crowdfunded supporters (including crowdfunded developpers) have been pushing forward the opportunity to participate in the game developpment to the opposite of big, bad corporations that do not listen to their customers. It is such a good opportunity that potential backers are offered the opportunity against a fee.

The lines are blurred: developpers consider that taking part to the alpha, beta releases is the same as playing the final product.

Not only they charge for the unvaluable opportunity of participating to the process of making the game, they lock in players who seize the opportunity.

Crowdfunded supporters work the other side, blurring the lines in releases. Alpha, beta releases are not releases. Only the final version release is a release.

It is a steel trap.

https://www.frontier.co.uk/features/…eNum=1&blk=214

There is a strong argument that players want the prices of games to come down, which sounds obvious enough – and that is effectively what pre-owned does, if you return the game after playing it.

Instead of thinking about technological means to solve the issue, what about making games that are not one run games, games that show gameplay, gameplay that once you've tried them, you do not come to the conclusion there is no game to play, only a product providing a process of learning that the product is not what it is?
Once a one run product is gone through, there is no loss returning them.
Returning a game that you will play in one, two, three years?

I also thought it was a scam to charge money to allow a fan to be a tester. Testing should be paid not penalized.