Share this project


Share this project

Take a ship and 100 credits to make money legally or illegally - trade, bounty-hunt, pirate, assassinate your way across the galaxy.
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.

Update #13 - A shiny Anaconda and free game expansions for £90 pledge tiers and above


Michael here again for a quick update on the fine Saturday. The first news is that everyone who has pledged at £90 tier or higher will receive any Elite: Dangerous expansions for free.

We also have a lovely new render of the Anaconda vessel:

Sean A Curtin has announced another crowd funded Elite: Dangerous novel entitled "The Space Farer's Tale". Check out his project in the link below:

I'd also like to give a shout out for Andrew Winter and his excellent site. He has generously stated he will pledge any ad revenue he earns from the site to the Kickstarter. 

Last, but far from least I'd like to thank everyone who has backed us so far. The support has been incredible. We're currently just under £750,000 - I'm sure we'll smash that number today.

Thanks everyone!


Doctor Doom likes this update.


    1. Missing avatar

      Andrew Sayers on January 4, 2013

      Hey Rory,

      They added the £85 tier in update 19[1] because a lot of people had asked for a digital-only equivalent of the £90 tier. So yes, the £85 tier will give you the expansions. Here's a great (fan-made) site for comparing what you get at each tier:


    2. Missing avatar

      Rory on January 4, 2013

      I'm a little concerned that the expansions are stated as being at the £90 tier in this post.

      I pledged at the £85 tier (which includes the £80tier) because the £80 tier is listed as getting the expansions.

      Did something change or am I going to be out some expansions?

    3. Missing avatar

      doa (deleted) on December 20, 2012

      For those that miss SPLs, heres a reminder of what was possible nearly 3 years ago.....…

      Expect the KS in 2013.

    4. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 19, 2012

      What does your comment have to do with anything? Frontier have promised *all* expansions to those pledging £90, so it seems reasonable that those pledging £40-50 might get *one* expansion (the big one).

      If you think the Kickstarter will be Frontier's only source of funding, then you are seriously deluded. For a starter, they will get funding from (new) sales of Elite:Dangerous, never mind publishers who will hopefully see that there is a market for something like E:D.

    5. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 19, 2012

      Blue Danube is a must!!!

      Here's an idea... a radio built into the dash panel of each ship. You could listen to different channels whilst you traverse the final frontier. It could be a similar affair to car radio in the GTA games, where you can scan through different types of music, including a classical music channel, talk shows, advertisements etc. You could also pick up distress calls which could lead to extra missions, bounty etc. Plus you could possibly have some illegal mods performed on your radio scanner allowing you to listen-in on police and perhaps even military transmissions.

      What do you think, people? :)

    6. Ian Bennett on December 19, 2012

      Agree with sentiments here on pricing. Currently pledged for GBP20. Not really interested in anything offered between that and the GBP90 tier. Would up pledge to 50 immediately though for free expansions.

      BTW, I vote for return of Blue Danube when docking!

    7. Missing avatar

      David Fitzpatrick on December 19, 2012

      Take a leaf from the planetary annihilation kickstarter they introduced a couple of tiers of digital only rewards. I upped from $50 to $90usd (~£55gbp) for their alpha commander. They got more money from me for a 1 bit permission on my account allowing me to create a unit with a slightly exclusive skin and stats.

      I would up my pledge from £20 to a similar amount maybe a bit higher for the anaconda and expansions. I'm an international backer and £105 is too much for digital rewards i want and physical rewards I don't.

      That would also free up my place in the £20 tier for someone new to pledge money for.

      Oh and maybe throw in a higher status decal or similar thing. Something between the £5 bottom rung decal and the founding elite badge. It's a small extra but in game exclusivity is a big reward on it's own.

    8. Missing avatar

      Theo Quick on December 18, 2012

      I think that the £90 pledge description needs to be updated with this new add-on for those that don't read this update.

      Hope we get there; lost way too much to my Elite on my Electron and looking forward to introducing a new generation :-)

    9. Missing avatar

      Conrad Klooster (deleted) on December 18, 2012

      For people From Europe 90 pounds is a lot of money for a game, if tou compare this to Euro's.
      for example Battlefield 3 premium costs 49,95 euros but you got all the updates.
      I sugest that the pledges for 40 pounds (49,95 Euro's) is a normal price for a game should offer a little more like an add-on or or skins. people like that kind of extra's and will upgrade their 20 pounds pledge to 40 pounds faster i guess ( i did it myself ) this way mor 20 pledges come available.
      for 90 pounds is two steps to far from 20 pounds and getting only the add-on's so again if the 40 pounds pledge is more attractive more people will choose that abouve any price below i guess. i did it without getting anything just to speed thing up !!

    10. Missing avatar

      doa (deleted) on December 18, 2012

      @ Chris

      FD have stated it will cost about *another* £1m to develop and implement the SPLs update to the point where they are satisfied with the quality. Thats almost the whole budget for the core game development itself. You can imagine the timeframe associated with that 'mini'-project.

      For those uninterested or unconcerned in SPL, then I urge you to continue your support for ED. Expectations by their nature are subjective. What pleasures some, irritates others - just think back to the Iron Lady. Now thers a nice name for new ship .... shields galore, and as slippery as an eel.

    11. Missing avatar

      bumper on December 17, 2012

      I'm rather content with what I get for my pledge. But I also feel with Marcin and Matt. There should be a pledge with just game and addons, all for download, no T-shirts, boxes, physical stuff. Given a reasonable number I'd up my pledge, but I'm not ready for 90,- and I'm not interested in the stuff between my 50,- and that one.

    12. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 17, 2012

      It's an interesting observation that the majority of backers have only pledged £20. The actual number is 10,000 out of 16,078, which means 62%.

      Where-as 2945 (18%) have pledged between £40 & £50, while 1268 (8%) have pledged between £90 & £150. (And the remaining 12% have pledged various other amounts.)

      So apart from attracting more people (with better videos/etc), Frontier Developments definitely need to do something to try to get that huge number of £20 pledgers to put in a bit more. As the £40-£50 range seems the next most popular level (and not too huge a jump), might I suggest that they offer the Planetary Landings expansion for those pledging £40 to £50 ?

    13. Missing avatar

      Marcin on December 17, 2012

      Sorry i checked prices i could buy 4 boxed copies of black ops 2 or far cry 3 for PC. I just want to put some perspective to the issue here ;-)

    14. Missing avatar

      Marcin on December 17, 2012

      No one is upset, but for 90 pounds i could buy 3 copies black ops 2 - thats how games are priced in my country. So 90 is a lot but 75 is something that i could painfully shell out of my wallet.

    15. ray moorhead on December 17, 2012

      Im surprised by the amount of people upset by the benefits from the £90+ pledges were u able to buy anything nearly as awesome from (insert highstreet brand here) u wouldn't get it for £20 more like double that, then take WoW as an example each expansion cost £29.99 to £39.99 BC, TWOLK, CATA that's at least £90 just on expansions, and lets not forget no-one is saying u cant get each expansion as and when its released separately.

    16. Simon on December 17, 2012

      Yes, I think £90 is too much to jump from £20 (most backers are at this level) just to get expansions that may or may not happen. It needs to be a reasonable jump guys - maybe 10 or 20 extra. I think if you do that you should meet your target as a big proportion will upgrade, well I would for a start just speaking for myself:)

    17. Missing avatar

      Paulo Cortes on December 17, 2012

      @Paul Batkin true, all of us would rather play something sooner than later. Still hoping for a digital-only all-expansion option, though :)

    18. Missing avatar

      Marcin on December 17, 2012

      Is it possible to make the expansion set access for £75? As an international backer I'm not interested in physical goods, and maybe instead of telling me to choose not to receive the physical goods i've paid for for additional 15 - I could instead go all digital for 75? After all, all the goods that i choose not to ship for me in the end are money staying in FD pocket, so both sides should be happy here as they still get funding boost from me and I can save some money on things i dont need too.

    19. Humbo [Founding Member] on December 17, 2012

      @TKJR3R and Matt,
      SPL on frontier was amazing when you first saw it, and then after playing the game for a while I would almost always dock at the space stations. Why? because there was essentially no difference gameplay wise to landing on a planet and landing on a space station. Correct me if I am wrong but the only game play element that required planetary landing was mining. I think in FFE there where some assasination missions that required targeting specific buildings in a city - but they always seemed to glitch for me.
      Infinity QFE has great graphics but unless there's a great reason for flying down to planets it would soon get tiresome. More than just checking the box for SPL I want to see real planet side interaction, big cities, small towns, vehicles variety in the flora and fauna as you would expect on alien planets and missions that really make you explore and interact with the worlds. I'm betting that's what DB and FD want as well, and I believe it will be worth waiting for.
      Besides I love Oolite and the original Elite as well, which don't have planet landings at all (I'm not counting the planetside OXP ;-) ) and I've played those through many times :-)
      Just playing the newest version of Elite with great multi-player will be plenty for me and I hope quite a few others.
      Anyhow, thanks to all the other backers here for giving me the chance to play the game I've waited so long for!

    20. Missing avatar

      T3KL3R on December 17, 2012


      Various people were expecting planetary landings because:

      a) Frontier, the game DB made 20 years ago had it, and...

      b) The technology has been shown to be feasible via projects like Infinity: Quest For Earth (an engine written by 1 guy in his spare time at least 6 years ago). See here:…

      E:D will have planetary landings, just apparently not right away. As this was a major point of interest for a lot of us, it's a disappointment. As long as it makes it in (and I believe it will), then I can be patient. But until SPL is part of the game, it won't have the immersion I'm looking for.

    21. Humbo [Founding Member] on December 17, 2012

      OK I just upped to £100 - This is the game I've waited 28 years to see. I'm not surprised to see all the arguments - I don't think I've read any forum where there wasn't some discord ("trolling" if you like), but it seems fairly good natured. FD have come out in the open about SPL and I think that's a good thing. People who object strongly can remove or reduce their pledge.
      I don't think they should be badgering other supporters to do the same - that sounds like "if I can't have it my way, then I want to see it fail".
      Anyway I hope to see many of you backers in the beta test, I'll be in the Sidewinder with the military laser :-D

    22. Missing avatar

      Matt on December 16, 2012

      I can't really see what some people are complaining about with the 'all tiers above £90 get any future expansions as well.' A lot of kickstarter projects offer precisely that. Regarding the Planetary Landings, maybe it's just me, but I can't really understand how various people were expecting to be able to fly down to planets in the first place. I was always expecting a cutscene to a port foor the landings unless stated otherwise.

      My only qualm is that £90 is higher than most, and there's honestly very little of the bonuses between the £20 and the £90 that I care for. Dark Wheel sequel? Haven't read The Dark Wheel. Music? Nup, only game music CD I've ever 'bought' was the one that came with the Skyward Sword 25th Anniversary edition. Beta test is nice, but nothing I'm fussed on enough to go out of my way to get. Boxed edition is pretty useless to me, given that I'd need to pay an extra £15 for shipping to get it. Access to backers forum? Nup, not really. Premium box with shirt and paperback? Don't want the shirt. Mug I'd consider though. Paperback suffers the same problem as the digital version.

      Make the expansion an add-on too. Say £20-30 for £40+ tiers, and and £30-40 for the £20-40 tier. Nearly two thirds of the backers are in the £20 tier, and most of them aren't going to move without good reason. Let the £20 have the expansion for £10 more than that £40s, and many will probably pledge for the expansion add-on. Others will figure that getting the £40 tier and expansion add-on is just £10 more than the £20 + expansion, so why not drop an extra £10 to get added to the naming database and the digital book.

    23. Stuart Kerrigan on December 16, 2012

      @David Moloney: I have to say this £90 "all extras, planetary landing" upgrade/fiasco makes me also think about lowering my pledge as all I'll be getting will be a stripped 'core' of the game. I assumed this would be like Elite, Frontier and FFE - my £20 would get me the complete game and that if I wanted to land on a planet I could.

    24. Missing avatar

      David Moloney on December 16, 2012

      I am pulling my pledge can't abide the £90 tier for future updates.

      Good luck DB hope you get it made and guess i will be paying premium at time of release.

    25. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 16, 2012

      A render of a Panther Clipper would be pretty awesome! I'm just looking forward to playing Elite again, but with all the bells and whistles of modern computer power. I'm guessing for David Braben this is a dream come true, as he's getting to make Elite closer to his own vision than he has ever been able to in the past. Giant derelict space ships might be cool. Ones that you could probably fly through and possibly land your craft in/on. What do you think?

    26. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 16, 2012

      @ Tom

      Hi Tom. There are loads of things I'd like to see in the next dev diary. A glimpse of the cockpit console would be cool, then again, will each ship have its own console as opposed to the generic one of the original games? Maybe a generic number of buttons/sliders etc. but different layouts and aesthetics for different ships.

    27. Steven Harbron on December 16, 2012

      Could we have a change to the tiers. An extra £70 to get all expansions free is way to much.
      If there was a the option of digital copy + expansions, I suspect many would go for this.
      Just my 2p's worth.

    28. Paul B on December 16, 2012


      That's a perfectly reasonable way of looking at it too Paulo. If this KS doesn't succeed then perhaps we'd be looking at something like that down the line. But as we are here now, I'd rather the core-game be 6 months into development in July 2013 than just kicking off it's KS campaign.

    29. Missing avatar

      Paulo Cortes on December 16, 2012

      @Paul Batkin Agree, and all that gives me the feeling that Elite would have been better served if FD had just waited some 6 months, and did a better job preparing for the kickstarter.

    30. Paul B on December 16, 2012

      @ Ian,

      We agree, legally FD could do a lot of things, that they've chosen to be transparent and tell us if they've had to make changes to their original plan prior to their backers finacially committing is to their credit not their detriment. If you think about it, they took a risk in revealing this and potentially putting off supporters, when they could have (legally) stayed quiet and let us commit blindly.

      I probably speak for every KS E:D supporter when I say that I would love to have SPL, out of ship roaming and being able to explore the inside of my ship on initial release. However speaking for myself - if the guys writing the software say that it isn't viable in the time frame or that they'd have to offer an inferior product to make it happen, I'm willing to wait until they can do it justice.

      I regard KS as being like any other business pitch, those that finance it have to speculate on whether they'll see a good return for their investment - the "return" in this case being a re-envisioning of a legendary franchise.

    31. Joe Scicluna on December 16, 2012

      I am sorry to see discord amongst backers. I am even more worried about any possible rift between Ian Bell and David Braben, after all, they developed the original Elite!

      It would be as sad as when the Beatles split up... Even if you don't agree about the way things are being done hold on tight to your dreams - it is healthy to disagree, but at least we are united by our desire to see this game to materialize! Then in time we shall see what can be implemented.....

    32. Tom OConnell [Blue lights on cop vipers] on December 16, 2012

      @Matthew & Ian,

      What are you looking forward to in the game ?

      What are the aspects of the game that you feel should be presented in the next dev diary/ update ?

    33. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 16, 2012

      @Ian Bell

      Just to clarify, I didn't mean you were offensive in a personal way and my apologies if it came across that way. You indicated that people were defending the project, so by the fact that it actually needs defending suggests it is in some way or another being attacked by some opposing force. The comments you've posted and the issues you've raised, in the way you'be raised them make you seem like you are in opposition to this project. The truth is that so am a bit of a fanboy. Not to the point where I'm being blindly led down whatever path David and FD want to lead me without question, but to the point where I have a genuine interest and care for this project. Hence why I'm here. My question to you Ian is, If I've just stated that I am a fanboy, by your own comments are you admitting to being a troll or indeed opposed to the project?

    34. Missing avatar

      doa (deleted) on December 16, 2012


      You are right - we do have opposing views on this matter. Why does that make me offensive and not you? You are expressing your views as I am. I have already stated why I have negative views on this matter. The fact that they are negative should not collar me with a troll tag as much as they should not tag you as a fanboy.


      I accept your comments from a legal point of view.They changed their goals midway through, which resulted in me and others changing pledges. I am grateful FD did decide to inform us of this as they didn't legally need to. Technically, they could even make a platform game if they were to change the project description, faqs and updates on Jan 3 . What is legally correct dosn't neccessarily mean its the right thing to do. If they did make a platform game out of this, then would you expect no-one to complain because legally, they did nothing wrong.

    35. Missing avatar

      Daniel Harrison on December 16, 2012

      Wow many lively comments going on. Let's keep the focus positive! Keep in mind that this is being led by someone who has all of our interests (about the game) at heart, but he will have to make difficult decisions on what can be delivered to bring it into existence. Keep supporting him and the team, and we will help him make our game become a reality. My view; David Braben wants more from the game than any one of us, if we provide enough positive nurturing through pledges, excitement and voiced support, he will ensure his team delivers the best they can! Regarding other space games (which are great in their own way), I choose to support and trust the judgment of a founding member who opened my imagination with the original Elite game, many Earth cycles ago!

    36. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 16, 2012

      @Ian Bell

      In all fairness that is a very honourable interpretation. Yes, I am indeed defending FD to a point, but more so I'm defending a project that I believe in.

      Considering that we have opposing views on the matter, it makes it quite clear that your stance must be an offensive one.

      I can think of only two reasons for this; 1) You're simply a troll and you enjoy the backlash that some of your comments have received. 2) You are indeed trying to have a negative effect on the outcome of this project for whatever reason.

      I cannot see any other reason for you to keep digging away at this point. You keep saying FD should have done this and should have done that, but they didn't and that's that. The only thing you can possibly achieve by badgering on is to try and discredit FD and this project.

      What exactly are you not happy with, as the focus for your argument seems to change when it suits you. One minute its about stating exact details of a project that hasn't even properly began yet, then its about how FD should've known from their original budget estimate exactly what is and is not going to appear in the finished game.

      Are you angry because you feel David has misled or lied to you? Or are you trying to highlight incompetence within FD for not knowing what will happen in the future?

      Either way this seems more and more like a personal argument and less and less of a valid discussion point. Here's a suggestion on where to aim your focus, the same place the rest of us are... on getting this project started, with as much positive attitude and enthusiasm as we can give!

      We're here to fund something we're passionate about and want to see happen. Not pick holes in minor discrepancies that are simply not the focal point of why we are here.

    37. Herr Antony Murray on December 16, 2012

      the guys at frontier should ask the guy that made this… if they can borrow it ,it really pushes the sale of the game i loved it

    38. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 16, 2012

      Contrary to some of the doom & gloom posts, I notice that the pledge rate on Elite:Dangerous has actually INCREASED in the last few days:

      The low-end projection (without any last-minute surge) is now almost $1.0 million, rather than the $0.9 million it was awhile ago. With a last-minute surge it will hopefully exceed $1.2 million, but Frontier still need to work at selling their Kickstarter. For example, they really need a cool video like the one done by a fan here:…

      (Hint: It has short but catchy video sequences, emotionally moving music, and a short "story" to tie it all together.)

    39. Bomoo on December 16, 2012

      That Anaconda is looking very spiffy! Will there be an option to automate turrets in some way? I don't see how a pilot can be expected to both fly a ship and manage turret fire at the same time, and even more so if the turrets cover multiple arcs on different sides of a ship. Perhaps some kind of targeting computer upgrade? Manual control might still be more effective, but would prohibit the player from doing anything more than fly straight and level, putting them at a defensive disadvantage. Unless perhaps you folks were thinking of letting one player man the piloting controls while the other mans the guns? I don't see how one player could realistically do both.

      I recall that in Freelancer there were technically turrets that could fire in all arcs, but in practice were useless unless they could fire straight ahead; getting into turret view was a sure way of getting blown to smithereens.

    40. Paul B on December 16, 2012

      @Ian Bell.

      I disagree Ian (RE: your response to my post), with a KS project, any details revealed prior to it's expiry is considered "up-front". At no point are we as backers consigned to the project until it's expiry and as FD have decided to reveal certain elements before this commitment point, I consider them to be "up-front". If I didn't like what I saw I could reduce or remove my pledge. You seem to be very hung-up on somantics when the fact is that if you don't like what you see, you don't have to support.

      If your intention was to illustrate that the intial pitch wasn't as well considered as it might have been, you have done. But this industry is all about changing goals and having to alter expectations in progress...may I cite the (very) last minute alteration of Elite's scanner after Acornsoft had already produced the manual? :)

    41. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 16, 2012

      Although we've been told that instead of time-acceleration there will be "local hyperspace" (i.e. short range) micro-jumps for in-system travel (presumably between planets), I'm still curious how David Braben will solve the problem of even shorter-range travel:

      Let's say you travel from a space station at planet to another space station (or perhaps city) on a moon that orbits the planet. Such comparatively short distances don't really seems suitable for micro-jumps, and perhaps more importantly I think you'd loose the sense of scale if you could just micro-jump from say space-station to moon.

      I'm thinking that this could be solved by allowing faster acceleration at faster speeds. So you'd reach speeds much higher than ever seen in Frontier, but it would take a little while. Meaning you could still travel large such distances in a reasonable time. You could explain this as some kind of automatic acceleration limiter for safety, which was required by law for all spaceships.

    42. Missing avatar

      doa (deleted) on December 16, 2012

      I too pledged based on the overview pitch I read on the Kickstarter Elite: Dangerous page with the full understanding that this project is in very early stages and certain things could and might change.

      Its quite simple, the FAQ "Can I land on planets?" was timestamped was created Dec 15. It should have been created and made available in early November with the others. I just hope others who pledged before Dec 15 and expected to see SPLs, manage to read the updated FAQ before Jan 4. I have no idea how the FAQ "Can I destroy planets" was seen by FD as having more importance than the SPL question as that FAQ was released in Nov. The answer to that is because even FD didn't know in Nov whether SPLs would be possible with the 1.25m budget. They should have.

      I too an getting tired with this arguement, but as long as people keep defending FDs position on this using their own interpretations, I feel I need to defend mine with my own. Most seem interested in discouraging any negative comments about ED as they fear such comments can only assist in derailing the funding. Theres an honorable interpretation for you.

    43. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 16, 2012

      In Update #12, some people were worried about save-game exploits, but I rather doubt save-game exploits will allowed in multi-player. Unless you are in true single-player mode (which never connects to servers), it makes sense that the servers will remember your last player state, so if you try to revert it you will be prevented from using multi-player (or whatever).

    44. Missing avatar

      Chris Handley on December 16, 2012

      Come on guys, you really need to stop feeding the troll: If you don't like how one fool is heavily spamming on about a single topic, the best thing to do is to *ignore* him, rather than respond & thus give him more reason to keep on posting.

      If he spams subsequent Updates about the same old tired topic, then he will merely be proving that he is a troll (i.e. enjoys upsetting people & watching the ensuing flamewar, and perhaps he has a grudge against David Braben & is trying to make the Kickstarer fail).

    45. Joe Scicluna on December 16, 2012

      It is great to hear from co-creator Ian Bell !

    46. Tom OConnell [Blue lights on cop vipers] on December 16, 2012


      Absolutely agree, it's time to move on from the planetry landing debate, we have the opportunity to back a project we've wanted to see for decades.

      There'll be a lot of unknowns from now until release, so lets all get behind the team and put our faith in FD by helping to push the pledged amounts forwards.

    47. Matthew Stripe Evans on December 16, 2012

      No, FD didn't provide these exact details up front, but neither did they promise it either. Ian Bell keeps mentioning products and dates but as I've said in a previous post, we're not buying a game, we're backing a project which at its core is still just an idea in David Braben's mind. I'm fed up of people not being happy with the graphics or the game content etc. the footage is not the game we will end up with, they're practically tech demos using some of the technology and techniques that FD are going to use to make the actual game. The reason they've done this is to flesh-out they're idea to give us something tangible to help us understand David's vision. Nothing is promised, nothing is written in stone. Certain things have been hinted at which include planetary landing but at very most FD could be accused of maybe dangling a carrot but so what?! They're just trying to get this project off the ground so we can all enjoy it, they're not trying to deceive us or rip us off.

      Ian keeps saying they should'be mentioned things from the start, but I have to disagree. FD are not obliged to tell us anything if they don't want to. I pledged based on the overview pitch I read on the Kickstarter Elite: Dangerous page with the full understanding that this project is in very early stages and certain things could and might change. To demand certain details with the attitude that FD is obligated to do this is just ridiculous.

      Besides, is planetary landing really that much of a deal breaker, really???

      This topic has gone on and on for far to long now. I personally don't see any need for it to keep popping up all the time. I have faith in David and his team and that's why my pledge is solid.

    48. Missing avatar

      doa (deleted) on December 16, 2012

      No Paul, FD did not provide these details up front. They provided them midway through the KS. I know I could still remove my pledge at this point, which I did, but such data should have been provided at the start. Using your logic, they would be justified in releasing all details 1 hour before the deadline, because technically, everyone can still adjust/remove their pledges.

      Regardless, its clear there is alot of passion for this project, and I have no doubt it will be funded. If the fans don't get it past the line, then I'm sure business interests will. I will purchase the game once and if SPLs come into effect. I just can't commit at this point as I cannot see this happening in the Elite series until 2016+. By then there may be other projects like Infinity offering the same carrots. ED as it stands to be released in 2014, offers nothing significant over and beyond others in the same genre such as X3 or EVE. It may in 2016, but as far as I'm concerned, this KS is all about the product in 2014, not 2016 or beyond.

      I do not have anything personal against the project and I wish and expect it will meet the expectations of its backer base. After DB got somewhat burnt following the forced FFE release, it seems he is committed to not releasing anything which will not meet his high standards. The flexibility of the KS funding model allows him to do just that, and it has resulted in significant game aspects being hibernated until further funding makes itself available for them. In time, I do expect this to happen, and when it does, I will be there to welcome an old friend.

      I will continue to monitor and contribute to its progress like I have in decades past.

    49. Paul B on December 16, 2012

      In response to those tho are disappointed by the lack of SPL (and perhaps other features) in 1.0. I struggle to think of any PC release in the last 10 years that hasn't received patches post-gold. There are quite a few titles (World of Warcraft is the prominent one in my mind) that have been tremendously successful yet didn't see release with all the features that were promised in the advertising.

      At least FD have had the honesty to say upfront (and before you actually part with any money) what will and will not be in the vanilla version. This does give those who feel that the game isn't meeting with their expectation a change to alter (or remove) their pledge and is a far more respectful approach to the project's backers than staying silent and just not delivering on the expectation, with a redundant apology.

    50. Trond Meier on December 16, 2012

      Appologies if this has been answered allready; Will frontier put in the rest of the amount if there is not enough backers/pledges? Say the project get £200.000 to little, Can Frontier then add that amount and make it happen?

      I've pledged £150 (+15 for shipping) and I hope it happens :)