Share this project


Share this project

Photo original
Take a ship and 100 credits to make money legally or illegally - trade, bounty-hunt, pirate, assassinate your way across the galaxy.
25,681 backers pledged £1,578,316 to help bring this project to life.

Use this space to cheer the creator along, ask questions, and talk to your fellow backers. Please remember to be respectful and considerate. Thanks!

    1. Creator Jörn Huxhorn about 5 hours ago

      @Theta Sigma:
      What happened on 2015-04-11T23:00? Some server problems?

    2. Creator Theta Sigma about 15 hours ago


      To me that looks like a very regular cycle of players, with a slight decline in the peak following the much-trumpeted 'honeymoon' period.

      Indeed, Sunday 19th April peak (and 24 hour peak) was 7,216 - which is still 79% of the 'All-time Peak' 9,139 (which was arguably well within in this 'honeymoon period'

      The game has, since release, been continually within the Top 25 to Top 50 of all Steam games.

      It will be interesting to learn what *you* see when you look at those figures? ;-)

      Let's move on:

      Owners: 74,437 ± 7,513

      ...remember, that's *new* sales in just 16 days.
      Monetarily, that's £2,084,236 ± £210,364 gross from £28 ea. (removing the Steam cut from the £40 price)

      Playtime in the last 2 weeks: 26:55 (average) 15:41 (median)
      Playtime total: 27:22 (average) 15:00 (median)

      To me, that looks like a game that players are really sinking a *lot* of time into.

      What else?
      How about members of the Elite: Dangerous Group on Steam:
      72,448 Members
      Note this ties in very nicely with the number of Owners reported by Steamspy ~74,437 the veracity of which was previously questioned and called into doubt: Waaa! But Steamspy is in Alpha - it can't be trusted etc. etc. ;- )

      What else shall we look at?
      Oh yes, how about *actual* Steam User reviews:

      'Mostly Positive'
      78% of the 1202 user reviews for this game are positive.

      Note: That's 'users' of the game Elite: Dangerous ...not fake reviews on Metacritic
      People that bought the game, have played it, and wrote a review for the game.

      However, as you seem to be so fond of Metacritic, let's take another dip into that hive of scum and villainy:

      Critic Reviews Average: 80

      'User' Reviews Average: 6.6

      Average of Top 100 'Most Helpful' 6.8
      Average of Top 200 'Most Helpful' 7.3
      Average of Top 300 'Most Helpful' 7.4

      Note, after the 300th review we fall into 50:50 ratio of 'likes' to 'dislikes', so by definition, currently, the 300+th reviews are no longer 'Helpful' and so can be ignored in the calculations since they were more 'Unhelpful' than 'Helpful'

      Bottom Line: The majority find the positive reviews to be 'Helpful' and the negative reviews to be 'Unhelpful'

      Now, I'm sure you'll have (what seem to you to be) very convincing reasons why each of the above means, in your head, that Elite:Dangerous is doing badly.

      Unfortunately, however, anyone looking objectively at all of the above points - taken together - would reasonably conclude that Elite:Dangerous is doing very well indeed for a niche game - E:D certainly doesn't have the global appeal (or marketing budget) of GTAV, for instance. Nevertheless, things are going well, and it's probably about time you gave up as it's just a waste of your time trying to stop the tide mate ;-)

      Don't worry, Wyzak, we get it:

      You're massively aggrieved over 'offline' mode (and numerous other related and unrelated issues that are very important to you)

      Bottom Line: Nobody really cares as much you seem to.

      However, feel free to keep posting on here - it does provide some light relief for the rest of us who drop in from time to time.
      All told, though, it's somewhat akin to discrediting someone's religious views:
      You will always believe what you want to believe, regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

      PS Rather coincidentally, it seems your 'review' is now #100 'Most Helpful' on Metacritic ;-)

      Wyzak Review '0' - "It's actually a 7 or a 8 game"

      I agree.
      It's currently a '7' (to 0 d.p.) and will become an 8.

      Well done Frontier.

      Roll on XBoxOne release and more new players.

    3. Creator Wyzak about 16 hours ago

      @Theta Sigma - It's convenient for them that they have "moved on" after wronging their customers.

      Have you also "moved on" with regards to our questions? And with "moved on" I obviously mean ignore them and pretend they go away because you can't are unable to provide an answer? - not looking so good is it?

      The Steam release has still not been announced in a newsletter, and the thousands of posters on the forums and the Steam community are still waiting for FDEV to tell them that they won't be receiving Steam keys.

    4. Creator Theta Sigma 1 day ago

      @ love bump


      Frontier Developments have moved on...
      ...and so have (almost) everyone else.

    5. Creator Avalanche 1 day ago

      @ love bump

      My previous short answer to you used the phrase "Based on everything that has happened since November last year..." and that covers a *huge* bunch of stuff, that in the interest of brevity, I spared you the details of :o) I'm not sure if you're still about, but if you're interested in a longer answer, then I can do that too. If not, then I would strongly recommend you stop reading now* :o)

      Some of this you may, or may not, already have heard about/know and although there *are* quotes/facts, it's all really just my view:-

      I say that there wont ever be an offline mode. My reasoning is that an offline mode was promised as part of the original Campaign and Frontier Developments removed it 22 months after the Kickstarter and just one month before release. They said an offline mode was "technically possible" and that removing it was a "creative decision", but they also added later that piracy was a factor (for a game a *lot* of people had already paid for). Their focus in creating a 'solo mode' (not offline) was their conclusion that the need for an offline mode was largely due to players concerns over "griefing", not about people wanting the game *offline*.

      In dealing with the backlash, Frontier Developments have stated how difficult separating the online from the offline is and how events, the economy, other players actions and so much of the game is driven by the need for a central server, but one that is run by Frontier Developments. Under such circumstances, it *actually* makes me wonder how much of a commitment they ever made to including the offline mode, with the timing of the change being made *so* close to release and the original inclusion being made mid-Campaign, when it's very success was in doubt.

      There really is so much more that could/has been said, but my view is that the question of whether an offline mode could appear in the future is at least in part a matter of intent, or lack thereof. Frontier Developments have moved on and as far as I know have talked no more about adding in an offline mode, or making the game DRM free. If anything, they've been consolidating the need for an always on connection (including the first signs of in game advertisements) and doing their best to not talk about it. To me, statements made so long ago about revisiting the offline mode were/are placatory, with no intent to follow through. The game has been stated as "Technically, it has always been [an MMO].", giving me further cause to think that an offline mode was never really a factor.

      As for the issue raised in Newsletter #49:

      Q. "Could the server code be released publicly some day when the servers are shut down?"
      A. "Yes. This is something we would do if for whatever reason we cannot keep the game going."

      They promised to include an offline mode, while taking £1,578,316, so my faith in such statements is zero. I would say to anyone that when the day comes for the servers to close and *if* Frontier Developments do release the server code, then that *might* be a good time to look at Elite: Dangerous. And maybe then it would also be DRM Free, as originally promised, but also retracted. It could even appear on GOG or the like and *truly* be DRM Free. But that's a big if, as Frontier Developments saying they will do something, doesn't mean anything. In the mean time, I would very much stick with, no, an offline mode will never be released, because Frontier Developments *decided* to remove it and go further and further down a very different road than promised. They *really* want this game to be online and I don't see them changing direction, even more so with their attitude, not least of all to those wanting a refund. The broken promise made under contract, which subsequently led to many refunds, didn't get an offline mode and Frontier Developments aren't looking to include it, when so much is actually moving further and further away from that.

      I can't know the future, obviously, but to me it's important to make a distinction. This isn't a case, as with so many games, of 'We're working on it.', 'On the back-burner.', 'We'll come back to it after release.', 'It's a problem and we're not sure what to do about it.' or such things that may lead people to discuss whether something will ever realistically happen. This is a case where Frontier Development have made an online game. They even refunded money (albeit begrudgingly). So I would very much say that the *opposite* of online occurring in the future, maybe, at some point, isn't something that they are going to do or are even looking at. Apart from many other things, back to the issue of intent, they don't want to. There isn't the intention to work on it.

      Anyone not really bothered by all of this will play the game :o) I think those looking at the game though, who want/need an offline mode, who are making the decision to purchase or ask for a refund, should very much go with the premise that an offline mode will never appear. *If* something changes in the future (even someone doing a SimCity on it), then people can come back to it then and reassess. For now, I see no reason to think that Elite: Dangerous will ever be playable offline and I wouldn't make a decision based on what I would describe as 'not impossible'. So... it's just not going to happen.

      And all this is why I do *try* to give short answers :o)

      * that might be a good recommendation regardless :o)

    6. Creator Wyzak 2 days ago

      Agreed with Fabio Capela - DB already deceived us with the whole offline mode debacle, how are we suppose to take DB on his word after that that if it goes pear-shaped that he will do the right thing?

    7. Creator Jörn Huxhorn 2 days ago

      @Fabio Capela:
      Thanks for your comment. I was about to write something along the same lines.

    8. Creator Avalanche 3 days ago

      @ Theta Sigma

      It's just FD's record.

    9. Creator Fabio Capela 3 days ago

      @Theta Sigma
      IMHO, it's impossible to tell. As seen with only announcing the removal of offline mode after it was a done deal and the lack of announcement about the Steam release, plus how they are keeping most of the content from patch 1.3 secret, Frontier likes to keep their cards close to the chest. If offline is implemented, we will likely know it the day the patch implementing it is released.

      """Braben has already addressed the very real fears that owners of the always-online game have should the game not be a financial success, thus necessitating server switch-off."""
      Not exactly. There was no promise, at all, of making the server code able to run on personal computers, no promise to release the server's source code (which would allow adapting the server if it doesn't run on personal computers) or the protocol (which would allow the community to develop a new server from scratch). It might also not be DB's choice; if the company ever goes under, without a legally binding contractual obligation the server software will belong to the creditors, and releasing it will be up to them. And Frontier already broke their first promise about an offline mode, so I don't think they can be trusted anymore.

      """Note: this is the same risk faced by all modern games which have an online-server aspect inherent to them"""
      Part of the reason why I don't purchase those games. The devs want to force players to connect to their servers to play, fine, I will take my money and playtime elsewhere. Plenty of games that don't require me to be online in order to play.
      Also part of why I felt betrayed by Frontier, and why I do my best nowadays to drive away any potential player ED might get. For me, at least, removing offline isn't a small change; it's a complete turn-around that makes the game far less enjoyable, and if a dev wants to keep my money after making that drastic a change, I will keep doing what I can to make sure they lose far more in missed sales opportunities than they got from me. Very glad right now friends and family had decided to wait for the game's release instead of making an early plunge like I did, allowing me to dissuade them from purchasing it.

    10. Creator Theta Sigma 3 days ago


      That's quite a bold prediction for the future of Elite.

      Being as objective and reasonable as possible on this, I would say definitive statements are almost impossible to make on this subject, hence my 'offline-probably-not-for-at-least-two-years' suggestion.

      If you recall, for almost 20 years, 'Elite4' was considered by most (including the staunchest-of-staunch fanboys) to be complete vapourware that would never, ever, see the light of day.

      The reality is that only the truly wide-eyed, Enid-Blyton-spectacles optimists believed that 'Elite4' would ever happen.

      So, looking ahead, the future of E:D is similarly almost impossible to predict with certainty.
      Braben has already addressed the very real fears that owners of the always-online game have should the game not be a financial success, thus necessitating server switch-off.

      Note: this is the same risk faced by all modern games which have an online-server aspect inherent to them

      Eurogamer: Looking further ahead, we're faced with the possibility that Elite: Dangerous will become unplayable if Frontier ever stops supporting the game and shuts down the servers.

      Braben: "We do plan to take regular archives of the game and the servers, to preserve the game for the future."

      Braben: "If it were ever to happen [Frontier E:D servers shutdown] we would be able to release an archived version of the game, including the servers, but of course this would not evolve any further."

    11. Creator Avalanche 3 days ago

      @ love bump

      Based on everything that has happened since November last year, no, Frontier Developments aren't going to release an offline mode or DRM Free game in the future.

    12. Creator Theta Sigma 3 days ago

      @love bump

      Additionally, other 'Solo' mode players' actions will affect the shared galaxy dynamics, too, and thus affect other 'Solo' mode players' observed galaxy.

    13. Creator Theta Sigma 3 days ago

      @love bump

      The purely 'Offline' standalone mode was replaced with a 'Solo' mode
      This *requires* ~10kilobits per second (i.e. 3G-level) always-online connection
      In space flight, the connection drops to a few tens/hundreds of bytes per second.
      It peaks at ~10kilobits per second (~1000 bytes per second) when entering hyperspace, and when docking (for trade prices, buying, selling, GalNet info etc)

      In 'Solo' mode you will *never* meet other human players in-game, only NPCs
      However, do note that the galaxy for 'Solo' mode players is *shared* with all 'Online' mode players
      This means discoveries of stellar objects etc, changes to allegiances of systems and stock prices *will* be influenced by online players and therefore this will be exactly reflected in the galaxy that the 'Solo' player observes.

      Frontier haven't ruled out *completely* a true 'Offline' mode emerging at some point in the future.
      But if this does happen it probably won't be within the timescale of at least a couple of years.

      All the best.

    14. Creator love bump 3 days ago

      so is there not going to ever be an offline mode at all?

    15. Creator Wyzak 3 days ago

      @John McNamara
      Also be aware that the game does not offer the offline mode which was originally on the table. If this is important to you, please look up your options before playing the game or that might be used against you if you hope to get a refund.

    16. Creator Theta Sigma 3 days ago

      @John McNamara

      In addition, if you're having problems logging in (if you've forgotten Login details...) send an email to:

      and/or: (reported by Frontier to now be defunct)


    17. Creator Theta Sigma 3 days ago

      @John McNamara

      Head over to:

      ...Login, and from the left-hand-side menu, select:

      'My Downloadable Products'

      The main pane on the right should then be filled with 'My Kickstarter Rewards' and 'My Downloadable Products'

      All the best.

    18. Creator John McNamara 3 days ago

      hi there i lost track of this one - i backed the game and am due a downloaded copy. anyone know where i can download it from?

    19. Creator Avalanche 4 days ago

      @ Wyzak

      Yeah, I skimmed through to see if there was even a mention and still nothing. So, I guess, not an oversight, or preparing something a bit more detailed, or anything. Weird.

      @ Random Element

      Amongst a number of things, I do like that there was a transcript in the article and that to many people, the following would not need to be heard to know exactly what it sounded like:

      Chewbacca: Rwwaaar.


    20. Creator Wyzak 4 days ago

      Still no mention of the Steam release in newsletter 71 (released today).

    21. Creator Avalanche 4 days ago

      Yeah, I don't know why they didn't comment on the Steam release. Not even a standard press release type thing 'Proud. Hard work. Pleased to announce. Culmination of efforts. etc etc' or something equally banal.

      Maybe it was released on Steam for those who frequent Steam to find it and get extra income from there. Otherwise those on the mailing list would mostly already know about the game directly. I do find myself additionally wondering if any other game has ever released on Steam before, without mentioning it in the game's own newsletter.

    22. Creator Fabio Capela on April 12

      @Joel Segerbäck
      It wouldn't really be needed in the case of Elite: Dangerous, since it's now online-only. The Steam version requires making an account on Frontier's system in order to log into the game and play, so Frontier would just need to issue keys that only activate the game on Steam but can't be used to create new accounts on their own systems.

    23. Creator Joel Segerbäck on April 11

      Looking at how other Kickstarter campaigns as well as Humble Bundle handle Steam activations nowadays, there's a way they could give backers their Steam version without risking them getting a second copy to give away or anything like that - Steam's API has a feature letting you link accounts on other sites - such as the Elite Dangerous Store account - with a Steam account, and giving that linked account permissions to activate CD keys on Steam. This way backers could link their ED and Steam accounts and having the game redeemed on their Steam account without ever being exposed to the actual redemption key, thus tying the ED account and Steam accounts together severely reducing any risk of a second copy being distributed.

    24. Creator Fabio Capela on April 11

      Not mentioning it in the last two newsletters — the first one released the same day of the Steam release — is strange, to say the least. Steam is the most used distribution platform for PC games nowadays, with the number of active users in the dozens of millions; there are more Steam users than the player base of all current gen consoles added together. Why not mention the Steam release?

      I can see two potential reasons. First is that people that purchased the game before the Steam version was announced might demand a Steam key — like is happening now — specially because Frontier has always said they didn't want to release on Steam, but Frontier doesn't want to incur the extra expense of releasing Steam keys for those players. Second is that Frontier might be trying to steer most new players towards their own online store, where they don't have to give a cut of the revenue to someone else.

      Despite logical reasons for hiding the Steam release existing I still see hiding the Steam release as not exactly ethical, though it's what I've come to expect of Frontier.

    25. Creator Wyzak on April 10

      Yep Paul, it's still being kept a secret... Now why would that possibly be? It's damage control.

    26. Creator Paul on April 10

      New ED Newsletter has lots of info on the steam release!!!

      Not fooling anyone? OK... there's nothing about it (still)... is it a secret??

    27. Creator Wyzak on April 10

      I am perma-banned on the Steam community, so can't post there.

      The bugs that I posted since Gamma have received zero attention from FDEV.

      I did however post about them on the Frontier support forum where I expect them to sit and gather dust.

    28. Creator Theta Sigma on April 10


      Good work.
      Have you checked the KnowledgeBase to see if these are known bugs?

      ...and/or raised Tickets for these bugs?

    29. Creator Wyzak on April 10

      Here are some of the bugs that I've recently encountered - most of them are due to the game being always-online... (not my video, but I encountered the same bug)

    30. Creator Wyzak on April 10

      @Theta Sigma - thanks for the commitment.

      Re: steam keys…
      "For those of you who already own Elite: Dangerous from our store and asked about getting the game in your Steam collection: we hear you and we’re looking into it. We can’t speak for other cases where the same question has come up, but turning customers into Steam customers unfortunately isn't 100 percent our decision and isn’t free for us in the context of the game’s ongoing growth and development. It could take a few weeks to work through, but we hear your feedback and addressing it is a priority for all of us."

      Sounds like a no to me. Not 100% our decision?

      I have indisputable proof that Braben is a criminal...

      My next post will be a collaboration of videos and images showing bugs that I've experienced over the last few days - most of them related to the always-online components of the game.

    31. Creator Theta Sigma on April 9


      I'll do my best to answer your questions in due course too :) it's quite a backlog - although part of the reason is that we just seem to be going over the same points again and again with everything coming back to the differing viewpoint regarding Kickstarter Projects - incidentally, this is the main reason most other backers choose not to frequent these comments any more.

    32. Creator Theta Sigma on April 9

      @Oldschool Shadowrunner

      Since it seems so important to you, I'll endeavour to answer your questions this evening.

      Although, I'm not entirely sure:

      a) why you're so interested in my opinions, since it's pretty clear your opposing standpoint means that you will simply disagree with everything I state - regardless of whether they're my opinions or third-party analyses and statistics.

      b) whether it will be in any way productive, since we've both made it abundantly clear that our views about Kickstarter Projects are polar opposites - from that starting point, it seems unlikely anything either of us say will change our views on that starting point

      In the meantime, latest E:D player metrics from Steamspy:

      Players total: 34,499 ± 7,198 (98.88%)

      So, we can be 98.88% certain that there have been "at least"

      [34,499 - 7198]

      = 27,301 Steam purchases of E:D since 2nd April

    33. Creator Wyzak on April 9

      Hi Tracer,

      The game released 4 months ago, but only a few days ago on Steam.

      Log in on the website and see if you can download the client from the downloadable page. If not, you will have to consult support. Bear in mind though that it could take a while for them to reply even though they replied quickly to Joseph. Send your email to both and or you might wait longer for a reply.

      Before you download, just bear in mind what @Oldschool Shadowrunner was saying: if offline mode was a major reason as to why you backed, you may want to consider the effect that downloading and playing online would have on your ability to claim a refund should the lack of pure offline-mode be a deal-breaker for you

      If you are expecting a Steam key, there has unfortunately not been an answer from FDEV on whether Kickstarter/website backers will be receiving Steam keys.

    34. Creator Tracer Actual on April 9

      Hey all, I haven't got my download for this game yet... but I just noticed it was out on Steam!?
      Any way I can get my game please?

    35. Creator Wyzak on April 9

      Sorry everyone for the wall of text.

      Announcements still not delivery by E:D
      1) Announcement on Kickstarter that E:D has been released - results in backers arriving every few weeks to ask why they haven't received their keys - 4 months late and counting
      2) Announcement in newsletter that E:D is now available on Steam - 7 days late
      3) Announcement in newsletter or anywhere for that matter, on whether kickstarter and website backers will receive Steam keys - 7 days late.

      What do they have to gain from hiding this?

      @Theta Sigma -…
      I'm not worried about how metacritic calculate their scores in the least. I'm just pointing out how you say one thing on one day and a completely different thing the next day when it suits you.

      If it's GIGO, why did you bother to use it in your advertisement?

      It's too early to truly consider the steam ratings, and I don't think it's fair to exclude the 300k (your figure) who bought the game before the Steam release (which still hasn't been announced) from their right to review the product that they bought. The steam release was on version 1.2 which is also 3 months later and 2 major patches after the original release. Obviously that will also have an effect on scores.

      By the way, what is the latest word on the the steam keys for backers, it's been several days? I'm sure Frontier wouldn't keep us waiting intentionally.

      Once more you are misleading. I did not cherry pick the results. I showed how you were cherry picking the results, and taking the sweet spot after 13 7's, because heaven forbid a 7 average for the top 10 is just not good enough. Ok let's include 5 more and bump it up to 7.1. But let's not add another 5 when it falls to 6.5. That is the very definition of cherry picking. My data on the other hand showed how the score falls across various statistically relevant amounts.

      Once more you specifically brought up the top 15 most helpful, but when we looked at the remaining most helpful, you suddenly jumped to the average score of the entire group. Of which they clearly haven't been voted as being helpful. So can you please make up your mind?

      You are making this way too easy Theta Sigma. Using the review that you quoted (misquoted I should say).

      His entire review says "Hard to know where to start with this game. The few things that are good about it are overwhelmed by the bad. This game is nowhere near the state that deserves a full price release. It is not even fit for beta. In empty shell" or let me write the first sentence for you in a different way. "There are so many things wrong with the game, that it's hard to know where to start describing all of the issues". Why would a person who feels that there are so many issues with the product, go out of his way to mention some of the good of the product?

      "It will come as no surprise to you to learn that this 'User' has *precisely* one review and one rating on their Metacritic account. Yep, you guessed it: for Elite:Dangerous." and if you look at my spreadsheet, you will see that there are more first posters giving the game 10/10 than there are ones giving the game 0/10.

      @Theta Sigma -…

      And that statement is something else that you misconstrued, and when it was pointed out to you, you simply ignored it.

      So clearly you've now read my list of things to which you haven't replied, and you still haven't provided single additional reply?

      @Theta Sigma -…

      You constantly call us the minority, yet out of the 25,000 backers here you seem unable to get anybody else to back up your views and post regularly? Why is that?

      In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[3]

    36. Creator Avalanche on April 8

      @ Fabio Capela (… ) &
      @ Paul (… )

      Ah, I see now. The comments I'd read were very much discussing Frontier Developments' 'handling' of something that everyone seemed to already know about and they didn't say any more, so thanks for the information. Very useful.

      In addition, judging by your replies and a few other comments (here and elsewhere) it seems the appearance of Elite: Dangerous on Steam has been both a surprise in it appearing so soon, but also without warning. Possibly without much preparation either, although that ventures further into the realms of both speculation, but also Steam < shudders :o) >, so probably best I leave it there.

      Hopefully more information will emerge.

      @ Random Element (… )

      The 'if it ever truly existed' part of "From the quiet killing off of the offline mode (if it ever truly existed)." stood out for me, in as much I do still wonder if in time from now, we'll find out any more about that. I have huge doubts about how committed they really were to it, as Braben & Co.'s reputation is shot for me. I can't help but be very sceptical.

    37. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8

      @Oldschool Shadowrunner

      I really don't think that's the case at all - on the contrary: I think you'll *always* be here - regardless of what anyone posts :)

    38. Creator Oldschool Shadowrunner on April 8

      @Theta Sigma - I don't think you have any rights to talk about "selective memory"... if you gave him the fully story we wouldn't be here, would we?

    39. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8

      @Oldschool Shadowrunner

      My favourite parts of our conversations are your selective memory :)

      For instance, you conveniently ignore the fact that I explicitly recommended your suggestion to Joe:

      "Before you download, just bear in mind what @Oldschool Shadowrunner was saying: if offline mode was a major reason as to why you backed, you may want to consider the effect that downloading and playing online would have on your ability to claim a refund should the lack of pure offline-mode be a deal-breaker for you and your daughter."

      ...but I think my absolute favourite bit recently has been that, despite all the best efforts of the refund-crew to 'warn' Joe against Frontier:

      1. Joe received a response within hours of his request enabling him to download
      2. Joe really isn't bothered about offline and the persistent universe 'issues' that seem to be so very, very important to those who 'warned' him (at great length) about them

      It was valiant effort, I suppose, but the reality is the vast majority of backers simply don't share your sense of hatred/anger/entitlement regarding the changes that were made to this Kickstarter.

    40. Creator Oldschool Shadowrunner on April 8

      A blast from the past
      I'm going to keep this as short as possible. I got a full refund of £100 including PayPal fees. I never played or download E.D. Hell, they never even addressed my tickets informing them that my user access stopped existing and that I can't download the game. (but that is a different story altogether). . What it took to get my £100 ($184).

      From November 18th, 2014 to February 05th, 2015 (approx 80+ days)
      14 - emails
      04 - Kickstarter emails to FD
      03 - Kickstarter emails to Kickstarter staff (useless)
      Numerous posts on the FD forum
      Numerous posts on the Kickstarter forum
      Numerous hours putting my case together
      01 - Registered Letter informing them of court actions (Thank you Mel & Ben) .
      It took them seconds to respond to my email informing them of court actions, ten plus hours to have the money returned to my PayPal account.
      What do you guys think is my satisfaction level with Frontier Developments with the way they handled my case?
      @Theta Sigma - Would you be happy with their performance if you were in my place?

    41. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8

      @Random Element

      What I find most.... fascinating about this whole comment section is the relentless stream of anger which has flowed from a tiny minority of ex-backers based initially on a kernel of annoyance surrounding offline mode and which has grown and grown in five months to become an all-enveloping, all-consuming negative view of anything and everything Frontier by that same tiny minority.

      PS Random, you should perhaps have suffixed your entire post with the word 'allegedly', since it should be remembered that precisely nothing, zero, zilch has been proven (either way) regarding your claims - no legal case has made it to the courts, no lawsuits have been actioned, and no 'damages' have been awarded.

      What *has* happened, is that refunds have been paid, and chargebacks have been instantiated and funds returned.

      Neither of these prove that there was any fraudulent activity whatsoever.

      Indeed, specifically regarding chargebacks:

      The law has now shifted so far in the direction of the consumer (after decades of almost all the power - albeit wrongly - being on the side of the retailer) that any consumer may now action a chargeback for pretty much anything (and for virtually any reason) and furthermore be *almost certain* of receiving their money back - to the ridiculous extent, that retailers are now rightly complaining that fraudulent chargeback claims from dishonest consumers are a major source of loss of revenue.

      That people received chargebacks proves nothing.
      That refunds were given, again, proves nothing.

    42. Creator Oldschool Shadowrunner on April 8

      @Random Element - Welcome Back.
      @Wyzak - You can take a horse to water but you can't make him/her drink. The kid is on elite bible thumping mission. No logical conversation or evidence will get him to stop.
      My favorite part of our conversations was when he was able to write "A purely offline standalone mode was replaced with a 'Solo' model (requiring ~3G~type ~10kbps always-online connection) In 'Solo' mode you will never meet other human players in-game" while he was on his phone but was not able to write anything about how this would affect someone who was planning on playing offline.
      I think he has a poor opinion of our IQ.

    43. Creator Random Element on April 8

      What I find most.... perplexing about this whole comment section is the continued defence of Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV and E:D. The comments would have died off ages ago if it wasn't for the crusade by the unelected mouth*piece of a multi million pound company. A company who have long since turned tail and abandoned this place leaving a trail of super hot charged particles of space cowardice in their wake!

      I've got my money back and was just sticking around to point misguided backers and gamers in the right direction, be it for a refund, download or to the Elite forum for information, and have a laugh at good old Meat Shovel heads unapologetic interviews.

      IMHO only time will tell if E:D does well, so predictions are pointless...not unless Fraudulent Devs patronisingly launch more competitions to hunt for and win some more carrots come XBone, Mac and finally PS4 version launches leading to artificially swollen numbers, which is totally guaranteed to happen, meaning Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV don't believe they have what it takes to constantly pull in new players on the merits of the game alone.

      What matters most is that Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV had the Universe in the palm of their hands and they let it slip away and were at one point about to fall foul of the law on multiple fronts. Fraudulent Developments PLC are still on their knees having to claw their way back up again using cheap gimmicks, competitions for carrots and Steam to do so. A fine example of a Great British company at work.

      From the quiet killing off of the offline mode (if it ever truly existed).
      The building, funnelling and abandonment of refund requesters in the two in-house limbo "support systems".
      Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV case-by-case review of refund requests thereby booting open the door to fraudulent delay tactics, smoke screens and the infamous boiler plate responses.
      The acceptance of partial refunds and then FDEV going into super silent mode, for months.
      FDEV asking for supposedly missing email account information.
      Receiving LBA letters and cowardly issuing refunds just 5 days after informing them of said Letters Before Court Action.
      The distraction and gimmicks of launching competitions for thirty pieces of silver and dangling carrots on a stick in the shape of graphics cards just before the surprise launch of E:D on Steam was funny.
      Lack of uptake leading to the capitulation, admittance and failure of plans to keep all the revenue generated from selling PC E:D through the FDEV shop by jumping into bed with Steam had to be the last resort.
      Steam must have been a VERY VERY bitter pill for Braben to swallow.
      Getting into bed with Steam is the only way to swell up the servers before the Xbone, Mac and PS4 versions go live so the new gamers might actually have some brown-noser generated content to mess around with when they jump into the E:D galaxy. FDEV will be hoping, with enough carrots, new gamers will stick around to buy crap to make their ships shiny and stuff. Even if player counts are low, you bet FDEV will be generating cash from virtual sales, if they're are lucky and can keep a hold of the newbies that is.

      If it wasn't for the self imposed crusade to defend Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV and E:D then certain characters would have moved on and the only thing moving around these parts would have been the tumble weed on rolling by....... not unless more interviews like this classic go out: and we all come back here to have a chin wag then bugger off again.

      As of 8/4/15 at 9.00pm E:D peaked at just 7,214 Steam players, but it's still early days yet....
      Who am I kidding? Expect another competition, and a price drop soon.

      Carry on Crusading!
      I'm sure Braben and the rest of Fraudulent Developments PLC FDEV team must really appreciate it.

      Have to dash!!

      I'm out of here......for now!

      Hope everyone had a nice Easter Break!
      Now get back to work!!!

      Ciao! :-)

      *I was going to type 'ring', but I wont as I don't want to lower the tone. There might be kids reading ;-).

    44. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8


      You can remove this one from your list of 'questions'
      Questions, by definition, ask a question.

      (an additional handy indicator - for both the person asking the question, and the person of whom the question is being asked - is that there should also be a question mark at the end of the 'question' :)

      But you already knew that, didn't you?
      ( don't need to answer that 'question' - it's 'rhetorical'

      What you have posted is in fact a 'statement'

      "@Theta Sigma -
      "Market prices would also fluctuate in a purely offline mode according to a modelled population algorithm."
      Only while you are actually playing the game. If you quit the whole world freezes and resumes exactly from where it did when you load it up again. But not in E:D solo..."

    45. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8


      You really should stop worrying about Metacritic and how they go about calculating their scores - remember: *nobody* outside Metacritic knows how they calculate their scores, so it's not productive to waste any more time speculating.

      FAQ #19
      "Can you tell me how each of the different critics are weighted in your formula?
      "Absolutely not."

      Regardless, *however* they do it, you should appreciate by now that it's GIGO - the 'Reviews' are not necessarily from those who own, or have even played the games being 'Reviewed' - there is no verification of how many hours a 'Reviewer' has spent playing the game.

      You really should try to focus a bit more on the far more respected Steam reviews and Steam Charts (...undoubtedly you won't, however, since it is very clear that you prefer to simply cherry-pick the reviews and Metacritic averages that align with your skewed world-view, whilst ignoring everything else, and denigrating opposing views as from 'fanboys', 'shills' or 'trolls' - you do realise that calling opposing opinions out as 'troll-like' is, ironically, akin to troll-like behaviour? :)

      All that said, regarding Metacritic, it really is *truly* fascinating to observe the 'zero score' E:D 'Reviews' appearing on Metacritic.

      The very latest 'Metacritic User Review' (for 8th April) has recently appeared.
      A five-short-sentence 'Review' yielding a (surprise, surprise) score of '0'

      "The few things that are good about it are overwhelmed by the bad."

      Really, fu8276?
      Care to elaborate on the 'good'?
      I guess not. Oh well, best just give it a '0' then :)

      "Hard to know where to start with this game."
      Oh well, guess they didn't bother then and just finished their 'Review' without even bothering to 'start' :)
      One wonders if fu8276 even bothered to 'start' playing the game :)
      Without officially-reported 'hours-in-game' (such as for Steam) we will never/can never know...

      ...and the 'User' (?)

      It will come as no surprise to you to learn that this 'User' has *precisely* one review and one rating on their Metacritic account. Yep, you guessed it: for Elite:Dangerous.

      (...also, 'fu8276' - auto-generated-user-name? #joke ;-)

      It is very interesting, also, to note that this 'Review' has already been 'Found Helpful' by 3 other 'Users' (despite the review only recently having been posted)

      Thanks, but I think I'll stick to Steam Reviews so that I can at least know for certain:

      a) whether the 'User' actually *owns* the game Elite:Dangerous

      b) exactly how many hours they have spent playing the game before they decided to give their opinion on Elite:Dangerous


    46. Creator Wyzak on April 8

      @Theta Sigma
      "...however, don't forget, if you calculate the average of the 'Top 755' reviews, you'll actually end up with the overall average of *all* the reviews (which is around 6.5 to 7.0 :) You can't have it both ways :)"

      Didn't you say just a few posts back that metacritic is clearly not using the mathematical average? Is your short term memory bad, or only when it's convenient?

      Oh ok, if Lars Doucet says so, then I guess it must be true. Who is Lars Doucet?

      Still waiting on your other answers, I'll even post some of them again for you:

      @Theta Sigma -…
      Elite Dangerous kickstarter was funded on 05/01/2013.
      The Eurogamer article we were discussing was published 26/09/2014. More than 18 months later.
      The kickstarter terms and conditions have no bearing on this. Would you like to try again?

      @Theta Sigma -…
      Oh, so you have a different account? Would you like to share the account name with us so that we can see how many projects you've backed there? What would your reasoning be?

      @Theta Sigma -…
      "Market prices would also fluctuate in a purely offline mode according to a modelled population algorithm."
      Only while you are actually playing the game. If you quit the whole world freezes and resumes exactly from where it did when you load it up again. But not in E:D solo...

      @Theta Sigma -…
      What? Not even a single reply? As Avalanche has also mentioned you are causing the ruckus and then not responding to our replies. Sounds incredibly similar to troll behaviour.

      @Theta Sigma -…
      Wow, so they deserve praise after "swiftly settling" "following threatened court-cases". Why was it necessary for users to threaten them with court action before they complied? Why did their support system fail for 4 months to provide those users with their deserved refunds?

      @Theta Sigma -…
      All of that semantics for what? You start with nope, and then agree that they may be entitled to a refund. Whether it's a BACKER's or backers, is irrelevant. Every single one of those 25000 backers could then file a refund request because the creator was unable AND unwilling to fulfill the reward. Whether only 100 backers want to do that is irrelevant.
      What is relevant is that under the Kickstarter terms and conditions the backers are allowed to request a refund and it is shameless that Frontier sent them on a wild goose chase for 4 months, and then had the audacity to tell them that they don't qualify because they tried the product before the offline newsletter was sent out, or that they backed the game because offline was on the table.
      @Theta Sigma -…
      Did you even read his post? Why would they create so much bad publicitly for themselves if they could have just made the problem go away by giving a measly 100 (your figure) guys a refund? Stupidity? Incompetence? Naivety? I'll leave that open to any open-minded individuals to decide for themselves.

      Or what about the post where his the co-creator of the original Elite who worked with David Braben for many years calls David's actions fraudulent amongst other things…

      @Theta Sigma -…
      That is my reply to one of your posts in reply to mine where you clearly didn't read my post properly. Subsequently you've ignored it.

      I'll dig deeper and see what else you haven't answered tomorrow.

    47. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8


      "So it just happens that you chose the sweet spot after the thirteen 7s and before the two 0s for your top 15 average from metacritic?"

      Not particularly. Looking at the Top 15 'Most Helpful' is a reasonable assessment of the reception on such a flawed review site as Metacritic, and also avoids the zero-bombing that occurred previously by an unrepresentative minority.

      Naturally, as you increase the 'Top XX' you'll start to include more '0' 'Reviews'

      ...however, don't forget, if you calculate the average of the 'Top 755' reviews, you'll actually end up with the overall average of *all* the reviews (which is around 6.5 to 7.0 :) You can't have it both ways :)

      "Steam Spy is still in alpha, so expect major bugs."
      Nice try, Wyzak...

      Except the Confidence Intervals and Confidence Levels have been asserted by the developer (...and, crucially, third party producers/developers - based on *their own sales figures*) to be "accurate"

      "Lars Doucet: I was one of the developers surveyed. For my own part I've checked with around 15 other developers, and every single one was within the margin of error."


      Was that the sound of you backing into a wall? :)

      "Elite has now fallen to 39th four hours later."

      As has already been discussed, E:D steadily fluctuates between around #26 to #40 on a daily basis - it has a wider global audience than other games with similar player numbers, and so rises to ~#26 during the west's night-time, and drops back to the #30s during the west's day-time.

      "compared to how many PCs and ~330k sold?"

      Consumer awareness is a big thing here.
      Many PC owners of a certain age (30yrs+) were still unaware of E:D until the Steam release.

      Console owners are a younger demographic, and the sheer number of consoles out there bodes well for the imminent releases, especially in light of the burgeoning awareness of this new generation of space-sims (NMS, SC etc.)

    48. Creator Wyzak on April 8

      @Theta Sigma
      "previous posts were simple statements of verifiable (and referenced) objective fact."

      LOL, objective facts you say. So it just happens that you chose the sweet spot after the thirteen 7s and before the two 0s for your top 15 average from metacritic? Yet if you even just add 5 more it drops to 6.4 add another five and it drops to 5.5. Clearly objective facts...

      "Steam Spy is still in alpha, so expect major bugs."

      Elite has now fallen to 39th four hours later.

      The Steam gamers are still in the honeymoon phase. Let's wait and see if the 300k (your figures) pre-steam buyers will get Steam keys and how the Steam figures look in a few weeks.

      Metacritic user score now 6.5 from 1405 reviewers.

      "XBoxOne release this summer (~10 million+ consoles)
      + PS4 release confirmed to follow after timed exclusive (~20 million+ consoles)" - compared to how many PCs and ~330k sold?

      "I may or may not reply to your wall of text (which had precious few actual direct questions)
      Since I have already discussed (at laborious length) the issues you are asking for further clarification on with many other posters on this comments thread"

      Backed into a wall and now you cop-out? I expected nothing less.

    49. Creator Theta Sigma on April 8


      @Theta Sigma
      "Just a correction on your advertisement."

      'Advertisement' is, of course, your perception of the content of my previous post.
      Back in reality, however, you'll note that all third-party statistics and figures stated in my previous posts were simple statements of verifiable (and referenced) objective fact.

      Top15 'Most Helpful' User Reviews Average: 7.1 (actually 7.3)

      Since I double-checked these figures prior to posting, it is likely that the average increased in the intervening 3 hours between my post and your reply.

      Regardless of Metacritic, however, it's already been discussed on here, at great length, that Steam reviews are a way more reliable assessment of the reception to any given game since reviews come from actual owners of the game, and whose time in-game is freely available for all to see (unlike Metacritic, which, as we've again discussed at great length is completely open to zero-bombing and other abuses)

      Let's dip in to the Steam Store once more, shall we?
      '75% of the 582 Reviews for this game are positive'

      "Oh and it is impossible to have a confidence interval of 100%"

      The figures were quoted direct from Steamspy.
      For instance, Steamspy displays Freestyle2: Street Basketball figures as:

      Players total: 99,269 ± 13,283 (69.26%)

      NOTE: The Confidence Level quoted (for the Confidence Interval of ± 13,282) could *actually* be '69.259%'

      Shown to 2 decimal places, this will appear as 69.26%

      So, when a Confidence Level of 99.999% is shown to 2 decimal places (as it it on steamspy) this will be displayed as '100%'

      When there was less data available (a couple of days ago) the E:D Confidence Level for the stated Confidence Interval was reported as 96.63% - clearly the Confidence Level has increased over the past couple of days as the data for those days has become available.

      Either way: we can say with *very close to 100% certainty*, that there have been *at least*

      [30,616 - 7,377]

      = '23,239 New Steam Sales of Elite:Dangerous since 2nd April'

      Whichever way you cut it, to have sold approaching 10% of the preceding four months' 300,000 copies in *less than a week* is extremely good news for Frontier, and the growing player base.

      "Still waiting on your answer to my posts below and those that the other people asked you earlier."

      I may or may not reply to your wall of text (which had precious few actual direct questions)

      Since I have already discussed (at laborious length) the issues you are asking for further clarification on with many other posters on this comments thread, I think I'll focus instead on the issues that affect the vast majority of E:D players (323,000+) as the game development and roll-out to other platforms progresses.

      Cheers :)

Show older comments