Use this space to cheer the creator along, ask questions, and talk to your fellow backers. Please remember to be respectful and considerate. Thanks!
Wyzak on 1st August
"Last 30 days is now only +0.41%"
Last 30 days is now +1.48%
i.e. 3.6-fold increase in 2 days
Also, Last 30 days Average Players is at an all-time high of 4,986
I do wonder how CQC, 1.4 and Gamescom announcement will affect that.
August 2015 'Average Players' will further increase upon July's result in the range +5 to +15%
i.e. 5,158 < August 2015 Avg. Players < 5,649
Happy to wait.
Have a great time, and keep us (regularly) updated :)
@all happy monday morning !
looks like sol is pulling out all the stops to shine on cologne this week. 33°C celsius expected by for thurs/friday *eeek*
hopefully FDEVs lay on some iced drinks - *nudge nudge wink wink*
Come on, I know you're itching to tell me how the scenario I've painted isn't remotely realistic and nothing like it would have happened, and a DRM-free offline mode would have (somehow) made billions for Frontier and everything would have been a bed of roses...
typo correction (before you 'call me out' on it :)
I'll add that one to the "list of ultra-long-game predictions made by ex-backers that failed to become reality"
"The irony is that people will be playing Elite 1984 in fifty years time keeping that memory alive, when Elite Dangerous is long forgotten."
I'll add that one the to "list of ultra-long-game predictions made ex-backers that failed to become reality"
Let me paint an alternative scenario for you, based upon your conjecture surrounding Frontier's accounts, and including aspects of the actual history of this project:
1. Frontier cave-in to demands of a few hundred offline-zealots and decide to release DRM-free offline-only mode as well as always-online (DRM-free off-liners are initally ecstatic)
2. Frontier misses the original planned release date and various other planned release dates
(...this _actually_ happened, remember, and was complained about, A LOT)
3. Due to the extra dev work required to release _both_ versions, the delays in 2. are even greater than they actually were, in this current reality.
....aaaaaand: increasingly vocal demands from both always-onliners and DRM-free off-liners lead to severe negativite publicity for Frontier.
"They've _never_ released anything on time!"
"This is worse than when they were producing for a third-party publisher!"
"I hate Braben! He's raped my childhood!"
"Where's the game I funded! WAAAAAAAAAAA!"
"Braben's stolen my heard-earned dough!"
etc. etc. etc.
4. Due to 3. Frontier rush out even-more-incomplete-than-we-actually-got always-online _and_ DRM-free offline-version.
5. Immediate slew of complaints come in about how unfinished and placeholder _both_ versions of the game are.
"This is way worse than First Encounters!"
"I hate Braben/Frontier/everything!"
"I want a refund!"
"I demand a refund!"
etc. etc. etc.
6. The DRM-nature of the offline version leads to CMDR L337 H4x0r and friends disseminating their own mod versions of Elite:Dangerous - procedurally-engineered galaxy IP also backward-engineered and disseminated throught teh interwebs.
7. Always-online players increasingly dissatisfied with skeletal-like nature of the unfinished game due to Frontier dividing their efforts between two versions.
8. Frontier updates to offline mode become increasingly pointless since each update has IP/algorithms that are immediately backward engineered and incorporated by hackers and/or competitors.
9. More and more mods and servers of hacked DRM-free offline release start to appear.
10. Frontier run out of cash due to huge move away by core user-base from always-online mode - income-stream dries up (remember, you said yourself they didn't have enough cash right at the start anyway)
11. Frontier fold.
12. Hacked versions of DRM-free mode proliferate, Elite:Dangerous mods become hugely popular, and all off the back of Frontier's IP which they essentially gave away to the community due to a few hundred offline-zealots being very vocal when Frontier suggested dropping offline-mode.
Frontier made the correct decision from an IP and business-perspective.
The views of ~100s of DRM-free offliners <<< earning potential from 100,000s of purchasers + retaining IP and company prospering
and again you let every argument bypass that you do not like and instead keep making statements that are simply false.
FDEV have stated that in the event that their servers would ever close down they would release the code.
in short, you get to play your offline game once the game is done & dusted. so in another 30 years by my counting ^^
@Theta Sigma a.k.a. Frontier Developments plc
"As a backer of this Kickstarter, by definition, my original (and continuing) aim was (and is) to see this project succeed."
I'll translate that for you. You want to delay the inevitable day upon which FD turns of the servers and the game dies.
"Success" for this project became meaningless on the day of Braben's switcheroo last year. The day when having taken as much money as he could on false pretences of selling a game people could play forever on their own computers, Braben announced he was instead going to rent you a game that relies on his computers. When he's run out of people to con into "buying" the game, he'll turn off the servers, and your game will die.
The irony is that people will be playing Elite 1984 in fifty years time keeping that memory alive, when Elite Dangerous is long forgotten.
"@Theta Sigma - "we can get back to the current, objective facts about Elite:Dangerous." - it can only be objective once you have shown that you don't have a conflict of interest."
Your statement does display incredible irony, and I reckon unintentionally so...
Would you say that:
1. Your repeated attempts, over a period of many months, to dissuade people from purchasing Elite:Dangerous, questioning everything about the game, the company, its directors etc. are completely and utterly objective?
2. Your motives for continually posting one-sided "observations" of many and varied aspects of this project often completely unrelated to the offline decision are in some way related to your reaction to the offline decision?
If your motives are anything other than objectivity in 1. (and the concrete evidence of your many failed predictions does indeed strongly support the view that you are _not_ being objective) then, in fact, it is you who has the clear conflict of interest.
Conversely, as an original backer of this Kickstarter, I have no conflict of interest, at all:
As a backer of this Kickstarter, by definition, my original (and continuing) aim was (and is) to see this project succeed.
By your reasoning, however, _any_ backer, of _any_ Kickstarter project posting supporting evidence of the success of the project and/or refuting outlandish claims as they occur (and which, with the passage of time turn out to have been completely untrue - see List of 8) apparently has a "conflict of interest" in wanting to see those projects succeed. (Really?)
I know from experience that you're quite the fan of questionnaires and surveys.
With that in mind:
1. Am I an original backer of Elite:Dangerous?
2. Do I still support the project?
3. Does this imply that I have a vested interest in the project?
Only if all Kickstarter backers have similarly "vested" interests.
hehe, excellent! all i got to was a few lines assembler and peek & pokes. there was also, distant memory, some turbo pascal?! somehow being digital native passed by me :/
I wrote a legendary and landmark gaming title - It was called Pest Spray and was published in Sinclair Programs :)
It took me ages to write because there were around 100 lines of BASIC code.
yeah we all have written a few legendary and landmark gaming titles, while running our own public company. and of course raspberry pi - pi in the sky right, pffft!
to you & me that comes easy. we do it all the time.
but most nights/days we spend on one of these internet sites typing away, really educating people how to do it. because, you know, typing we are kind of good at.
isn't it ^^
@deusx_ophc - "Or maybe it is just a Kate herself says One inflammatory sentence pulled out of a three hour chat" Hey I pulled out about half a dozen inflammatory sentences here! If you want any more you'll have to do you're own pulling. :-)
"from all i have seen they are a very hard working bunch." Yes I agree. That makes it all the more sad that what they've produced is so bad. They really had no idea what they were getting into. They've never managed to finish a big game in the whole histry of the company. Look at First Encounters. Look at Outsider. All they can do for themselves is shallow collections of mini-games for kids. With animals and coasters. So what they did for a space game was a shallow collection of mini-games with animals changed to spaceships and coasters changed to planets. Tragic.
just in case it wasn't clear what poor kate (sry for dragging you into this backwater, it is worse than slough! ) said:
"I have absolute confidence we’ll still be playing @EliteDangerous a year from now” on 23. June 2015
Or maybe it is just a Kate herself says "One inflammatory sentence pulled out of a three hour chat and used along with my name as a headline to boost some sad attention-seekers upvotes on Reddit doesn’t bother me in the slightest. But I hope the people at Frontier who might have seen that post get to see this one as well. Because they are people who work incredibly hard on something we all feel passionate about. And they are the ones who get my upvote."
Kerrash is also not on the FDEV payroll. he has been asked by them to promo/demo and no wonder, his enthusiasm for all things elite is infectious. you could use some of that yourself shadowrunner. so kerrash you can expect FDEV paying travel expenses and maybe some compensation, but no salary. he has a job to make a living.
but i take your point, he will defend them where he can. and why not? from all i have seen they are a very hard working bunch. surely prudent and in fact OLDSCHOOL in their approach but learning fast from being 3rd? party developer to publisher.
but all this is little to you. you have been let down in a matter so close to your heart and there is little anyone but you can do about this.
@deusx_ophc -Yeah, looks like Kate Russell did a u-turn after some serious backlash for saying what she thinks of the poo that is Elite Dangerous. Probably an email storm of hate from the ED fanbois. Here's another quote from her in that discussion: ""A shame a shame I hope David Braben listens to this and maybe goes Oh I've been a bit of a fool really. But I doubt it."
Ad for that response from Kerrash, don't forget that he works for Frontier.
@Theta Sigma oh damn! thanks for helping out there mate. didn't even notice it before you mentioned it.
i blame copy & paste ^^
If you feel aggrieved and decide to report deusx_ophc for not being respectful or considerate, please bear in mind that Kate Russell's comments were not aimed at anyone in particular but rather "sad attention-seekers" in the general sense.
@Oldschool Shadowrunner and again you are just using your shock & awe style with linking only the "juice" part of what Kate actually said. only in the context that you want to use it.
as you full well know Kate herself posted various comments on how she has 1) been taken out of context and 2) put the record straight
anyone that wants to read the full context follow below ^^
"One inflammatory sentence pulled out of a three hour chat and used along with my name as a headline to boost some sad attention-seekers upvotes on Reddit doesn’t bother me in the slightest. But I hope the people at Frontier who might have seen that post get to see this one as well. Because they are people who work incredibly hard on something we all feel passionate about. And they are the ones who get my upvote."
@Wyzak - "So they've dropped the timed exclusive, but with seamingly no mention of it coming to
other previously unannounced platforms?"
You got it. A month ago Braben's announcement of the timed exclusive said PS4 would follow. In an interview I saw with him from E3, when asked about PS4 he said "I can't talk about that".
You're right OS, I hadn't checked. Basically because I couldn't be bothered. But this goes to show that not doing the research can lead to trouble. One thing is certain - waiting for the the ofiicial figures in September is the only way of knowing for definate what FD's financial position is, and frankly I couldn't care less what it was in the past.
Until then, I won't be taking part in any discussions regarding finances because it's just playing your game.
Have a nice day :)
@el_tel "I honestly can't be bothered to find the link, but it was mentioned in a relatively recent financial statement that the credit facility with Barclays had been reduced from £4 mil to £1 mil."
According to the financial statement, the recently mentioned credit facility DID NOT EXIST at the time Frontier was facing bankruptcy before the ED Kickstarter launch.
In case that's not clear, I am calling bullsh*t on your claim "Remember that at the time, FD had a credit facility of several million pounds ".
Have a nice day! :-)
That should have been "reduced" not "educed" (...before you call me out because the document makes no reference to an "eduction" in the credit facility)
...although, I think it was actually educed from £3 mil to £1 mil
Yes. You are correct, it was.
Similarly, I can't be bothered to provide it for him.
Perhaps OS should do his research more thoroughly before making unsubstantiated claims. That might go some way to improving his currently dire hit-rate.
I honestly can't be bothered to find the link, but it was mentioned in a relatively recent financial statement that the credit facility with Barclays had been reduced from £4 mil to £1 mil.
Objectively, I know we should take each issue/claim independently...
However, just as a personal observation, your track-record regarding predictions, claims and counter-claims (see: List of 8 failed predictions that were once championed as almost-certainties) it does rather seem as though your chances of debunking anything on here are slim-to-none.
Anyway, sorry, you were saying?
@el_tel - "Remember that at the time, FD had a credit facility of several million pounds".
That would be very naughty, if true, because they failed to declare any such arrangement in the accounts. So what's your source of this info?
And even if they did have such a facility, how long do you think a mere £3m could have kept Frontier alive, given the rate at which it was burning money. Not very long at all.
"So the loss for the year before the KS was due to writing down the investment of The Outsider? So how is that relevant exactly? " It is relevant to my debunking of your "claim it COULD have been like this: We have £7 million available to fund development of a new game".
"A write down from work in progress of £4,609,196 for the game 'The Outsider'"
Since 'The Outsider' was intended to be an open-world political thriller set in and around a city, one wonders how much of the £4.6million spent on development might dove-tail into the scheduled ship-roaming and planetary landings.
It seems unlikely that Frontier trashed the hard-drives when the project was moth-balled/canned.
Actually I was just reading the filings in your link. So the loss for the year before the KS was due to writing down the investment of The Outsider? Thanks for that. It saves me digging through the reports.
So how is that relevant exactly? (apart from something to include in your conspiracy theory). Remember that at the time, FD had a credit facility of several million pounds (recently reduced voluntarily) so DB was hardly 'staring bankrupcy in the face' as you put it.
Plus the IPO subsequently bought in several million.
I think I now know a lot more regarding FDs financial position. Thanks for that.
@el_tel - "See what I mean when I say ignoring anything that doesn't agree with their view?" I didn't ignore your view about ED funding. Despite that it is complete fantasy. I took the time to show you the truth from Frontier's accounts and point you to the proof.
Here is a quote to get you started. Official Frontier filings, note. Accounts 2011.
"We were unable to complete a suitable contract to pubhsh 'The Outsider' game we are developing, and as a result decided to suspend the project for the time being and shift effort to our other projects due to the uncertain timetable for further development and subsequent release of the game, the Directors have dec1ded to take a cautious and prudent approach to the valualton of this game. Therefore we have made a matenal write down down under work in progress for 'The Outsider'.
A wnte down from work in progress of £4,609,196 for the game 'The Outstder' has been absorbed into the financial year's profit and loss."
See what I mean when I say ignoring anything that doesn't agree with their view?
Anything further to say in your defence of the list of 8 predictions that were relentlessly plugged on here, and yet all failed to transpire? (typos/semantics aside)
@el_tel - "Becasue it COULD have been like this: "Right! We have £7 million available to fund development of a new game. I'd love to use that to make a new Elite, but will anyone buy it?"
Could have been, but wasn't. Frontier had NO money to fund the new Elite which had already been stuck in development hell for ten years. Frontier was in a dire financial state. It had just lost million of pounds on The Outsider due to Codemasters gving up hope of it ever getting finished to a salable quality, and Braben couldn't get any other publisher to take it. Frontier had only enough cash in the bank to pay the salaries for a couple of months. Braben was staring bankruptcy in the face.
That's when Braben came up with the brilliant idea of conning Elite fans into saving his company.
Proof is in the company accounts https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02892559/filing-history…
I suppose this one can also now go down on the huge ever-growing list of things that ex-backers state as fact that, in fact, have no basis or supporting evidence in reality?
Additionally, I'd say the nowgamer interview from Nov 2012 almost certainly confirms it.
Thanks for that. So it pretty-much confirms that my guess was correct.
Thanks, was literally just about to post that link, too.
Yes, that was how the Kickstarter was discussed at the time:
A way to simultaneously gauge interest _and_ raise additional funds.
Here's another article, confirming el_tel's suggestion was, in fact, the case (from 6th November 2012)
NG: Did you anticipate the Elite: Dangerous Kickstarter would take off the way it has done?
DB: To be honest, I wasn’t really sure. So far, it’s been great. Huge thanks to all those people who have pledged. It’s fantastic that there is the level of interest that there was out there.
NG: What was the discussion leading up to this Kickstarter project? I know part of it was you said you wanted to gauge the interest.
DB: Well, that’s right. I get lots of emails saying "can you do Elite" but you say well, if it’s only a few hundred people… there are other people out there, aren’t there?
It seems there were/are quite a few more than a few hundred people (...at least 600,000+, to date)
Although perhaps he was right on one thing:
Only a few hundred really caring about an offline mode %^]
el_tel: A useful interview regarding the budget:
Becasue it COULD have been like this:
"Right! We have £7 million available to fund development of a new game. I'd love to use that to make a new Elite, but will anyone buy it? I know, we'll use KS to see if there's enough interest, and we'll do that by asking for £1.25 mil"
RE: The Disgraced 'Elite Dangerous Refunds Group' and their Metacritic 'voting strategy'
Glad you noticed what I'd uncovered on that score.
Interestingly, the two posts in which I provided screenshot evidence of that 'strategy' being discussed and confirmed have now been deleted by Kickstarter (despite having no personally identifiable information contained therein due to deliberate pixelation)
Who might have reported these two posts to Kickstarter?
Wyzak, perhaps you are able to provide us with some assistance on this issue? %^]
Well it's either that or, err... how shall I put this, they struggle to grasp anything other than simple concepts, in which case they have my sympathies.
The thing is, without us here to refuse the outlandish claims they're making, any casual passer-by may be fooled into thinking that they actually speak the truth, and have some concrete knowledge about whatever it is they're saying.
I prefer to back up any claims I make by doing some research, and when I make any claims, they usually come with a disclaimer that I may be wrong, or are just my opinion. I also tend to provide links to my research sources so readers can verify for themselves and form their own independent opinions.
From what I've read here, Wyzak et al do not do this, and present (negatively-slanted) guesswork as fact. They also conveniently ignore anything that disagrees with their own view.
Being unhappy with FD (for whatever reason) is one thing, and posting on here to express that unhappiness is fine by me. But conducting a vendetta against FD by posting lies and half-truths is where I begin to wonder what their motivation is.
@el_tel "I think you're assuming that the £1.5 mil raised via KS was supposed to be the budget" No assumption needed. Braben said "From where we are now, £1.25 million / $2 million will get us the minimum game based on our tech and artist-directed procedural generation techniques"
"whereas my understanding is that it was to gauge interest." So how did you think that was going to work? Braben takes millions of pounds from backers, and then tells them thanks for the interest, but that's not enough to make your game?
@Harbinger "At least you're no longer living in denial about royalties contributing to the overall pot" You are really having trouble understanding this. Read the accounts again. They show that the costs allocated to those royalties far outweigh the income. Frontier's royalties aren't making any profit. They are making a loss.
@Oldschool Shadowrunner: Metacritic user scores are as useful as imdb ratings. They're plagued by tactical voting with zero votes heavily skewing genuine votes but then you already know this being that you and your Offlingate buddies have done your fair share of tactical voting on Elite: Dangerous in an attempt to bring it's user score down.
At least you're no longer living in denial about royalties contributing to the overall pot so that's progress at least. We'll have this conversation again when the Full Year report is out in early September I'm sure.
"I think both you and Wyzak are being deliberately obtuse."
So developing ED cost £6 mil more than expected eh? I think you're assuming that the £1.5 mil raised via KS was supposed to be the budget, whereas my understanding is that it was to gauge interest.
I think both you and Wyzak are being deliberately obtuse.
"5. Total sales (will stall and Frontier will fold)
Reality: Mac, XBoxOne sales now contribute to Steam sales and Frontier store sales, total sales continually rising."
Please note, point No. 5. has the title "Total sales"
Total sales: "Mac, XBoxOne sales now contribute to Steam sales and Frontier store sales"
All of the above, Mac, XBoxOne, Steam and Frontier contribute towards "Total sales".
Care to move onto the actual points being made rather than wilfully misinterpreting semantics?
@Theta Sigma a.k.a. Frontier Development PR man
"Reality: Mac, XBoxOne sales now contribute to Steam sales and Frontier store sales" Only in your imagination, TS. In the real world, Xbox One ED is not being sold by the Steam store or the Frontier store.