I'm a massive fan of the original Elite. Created by Ian Bell and David Braben in 1984, you could explore the universe, make money in the trading market, get paid to take people and goods from A to B, attack people to steal their cargo, hunt bounties, start dogfighting with random NPCs, practice docking at ridiculously high speeds and angles, or just go around being a jerk and destroy every ship you see.
On top of that, it had a vast, procedurally generated universe, with more than two thousand planets and space stations, each with a different story and always the potential for a new efficient trade route or a lair of pirates for easy bounty. And it was one of the first, if not the first, game where you weren't expected to do what the game told you to. All this? Yours. You do what you find fun, and the game will not judge you for it. Even the save system helped with that, essentially allowing players to "respawn from last checkpoint" on their death.
All of those things led to the game being a huge success (and 3D being somewhat rare in 1984 probably helped a bit), and Braben continued the series. Frontier: Elite II and Frontier: First Encounters added more to the game. In my opinion, the "realism" marred the games, as controlling the ships became more of a chore and there was too much admin involved with simple tasks like docking. But others were happy with this direction, and these were a moderate success.
So imagine how I felt when, in early December 2012, I saw the Kickstarter for Elite: Dangerous, a sequel promising to be closer to the original Elite in terms of gameplay but having many of the features of later games, with some new ones too, including online multiplayer! I wanted it!
I looked through the FAQ and it all looked good. DRM-free - great, a hassle-free install that I can reuse when I change computers. A groups system for multiplayer - should help avoid the idiots. They're very optimistic on how they believe they can solve griefing, but I'm sure they'll test it beforehand. Not subscription-based, so my money buys me a product rather than rents it. Mission system means more variety. Should run on most PCs, hopefully including mine. Cool.
I made a token pledge - I didn't really want an Elite MMO, but it was a new Elite and I wanted to support it. Shortly afterwards, gameplay footage was released, and it was the good arcadey original kind; furthermore, they'd updated the page to show that it wasn't an MMO, that there'd be an offline single player mode. Offline play means I can go and see my mother (no internet connection) or girlfriend (limited data plan) and play it there too, and that I can play at my own pace peacefully. So I upped my pledge to ￡105, to access the first round beta, as well as gaining access to the Private Backer forums.
So, in February 2013 I joined the forums, had a fun time. I noticed that there were a lot of people asking for help on various other games that were being ignored. I pointed this out, to no response. Whatever.
Then a troll, Bungarus, got involved, complaining about the instancing mechanic. A lot of arguing ensued. In the heated discussion, a lot of my points and suggestions for compromise were dismissed as "repeated simplifying and falsifying rants"... only to be repeated by the troll himself later as though he thought of it himself. And of course, my pointing that out only lead him to selectively quoting what I had to say, such that it completely misrepresented what I said.
The thread was closed because of "circular discussion". It was obviously one user actively trying to block out what others wanted to say. And that user won. This did not bode well.
Then a second troll, Fromhell, started a thread regarding PvP/PvE, and decided to basically insult everyone who disagreed with his opinion. The suggestion was simply having separate PvP and PvE groups, in which players that want PvP and players that don't essentially never see each other, and both can play with their desired attributes. Players that want to attack other players can do so knowing the other players have also signed up for that. Players not wishing to engage in player combat can do so knowing every other player they see has agreed to that too.
There are lots of reasons to support this regardless of which side you are on, and a few legitimate complaints against it too. However, none of those legitimate complaints are "People like you always cause a gamey, watered down experience for the majority."
His threads were also closed because of "circular discussion". It was obviously one user actively trying to block out what others wanted to say. And that user won. When this user was continually allowed to repeatedly throw claims like this around, I understandably got annoyed and began to get more aggressive, eventually sinking to personally attacking him. I rightfully got suspended for this. When I returned from the suspension I simply blocked him and a couple of other trolls and proceeded not to get involved, which is what I should've done in the first place. This led to seeing entire pages of "This post has been hidden because the user is on your ignore list", which led me to complain again about how the forum was overrun with trolls.
And then I got suspended again. Not for complaining about the trolls. No, I got suspended for explaining a joke. To be specific, a user said he'd call his ship "WDYGFY" and wait for people to work out what it stood for. Alien, a friend of mine on the forums, didn't understand the joke, so I explained it to her: I said 'It stands for "Why Don't You Go F Yourself?"' I didn't use the word involved, and it was obviously in the context of explaining the joke. Alien didn't even realise what I said could've been misconstrued as insulting her.
I appealed the decision, explaining all this to the moderators. What was the response?
"Sorry, I thought you were insulting her. My mistake! I'll reinstate your posting privileges." ... Nah, they didn't say that.
"I understood what you meant, but it could have been interpreted as aggressive language so try to avoid it." ... Nah, they didn't say that either.
In fact, they said nothing. They did, however, remove the offending posts (leaving one explaining how "WDYGFY" would be pronounced, which looked really weird without context - they've since replaced them, except for mine). At this point I knew it wasn't about the joke at all. I was a dissenting voice on the forums, and that was dangerous for the incompetent mods that wanted to keep their positions. So, after my suspension was over, on the 10th of August, 2013, I made a final thread on the forum, explaining everything that had happened:
"
I'm out. I've been out for a while, but I came back to confirm it.
You may have noticed I haven't posted recently. That's because, for a short while, I had my posting privileges revoked for using the letter F to explain a joke. No, really.
And that's part of the reason I'm out. I joined this discussion forum for two reasons - quite a fan of Elite, and also I wanted to discuss stuff. Unfortunately, from the way that trolls are given free reign of the board to the way that anyone even trying to be remotely lively being pulled in, it sees like absolutely everything possible is being done to actively prevent discussion.
At first, it was amusing to see threads being locked over "circular arguments" when it was obviously one person saying "orange is a shade of blue" and someone else saying, "no it isn't". It's as though there's too much of a, "oh, everybody's right, even the guy who's saying orange is a shade of blue!" attitude. But with that attitude, any discussion with a such-minded individual involved simply cannot go anywhere, meaning all discussion is ultimately pointless. And when one of them is quite clearly doing it deliberately to halt discussion, I see no reason for it.
So, with discussion completely out of the window on this discussion forum, I'm left chatting to a load of old guys about a game that came out seven years before I was born. Which is great, but ultimately unfulfilling, especially when it leaves me unable to post because I'm not allowed to explain jokes.
And there we are. I'm out. Maybe with a complete renewal of the mod team it might be worth coming back, but at the moment I don't see the point if neither discussion nor fun is allowed. I'll take my discussions and my fun elsewhere. I can only hope the way this forum is run isn't an accurate reflection of the way the game's run.
"
Shortly after leaving the forum, I was alerted that this section had been added to the forum:
"
Contesting A Moderator's Decision
If you disagree with a moderator's course of action over an incident, whether that be the closing of a thread or the issuing of an infraction, you must contact them or another member of the moderation team privately to voice your grievance. It is not acceptable to do this in a public thread, any attempt to do so will be seen as an attempt to undermine the moderation team and will result in an infraction. If you disagree with a moderator's decision it is also not acceptable to verbally abuse or harass them, either through the forum or any other form of communication- any attempt to do so may result in a permanent ban from the forums.
"
Of course, that's a response made to imply that I hadn't attempted to contact a member of the moderation team to voice my grievance. I had, and it was ignored. I also love how this is basically saying, "MODS ARE ALWAYS RIGHT," dismissing any notion otherwise. For what it's worth, the two mods involved (T.j. for harmfully and stupidly locking threads, and Brett C. for suspending me over a joke) are still moderators on the forum. No apology has been given for anything regarding the situation whatsoever. That's okay, I had no intention of dealing with those guys ever again anyway, short of naming my ship "WDYGFY BRETT".
My favourite sentence from my leaving post is the very last one. "I can only hope the way this forum is run isn't an accurate reflection of the way the game's run."
It seems I was optimistic there.
I had backed at Premium Beta level. In May 2014, I finally got the chance to experience the game. And, as I wrote on Chaos Reborn forums:
"
My three-hour long docking ordeal involved:
- Requesting docking permission
- Re-requesting docking permission because it immediately timed out.
- Re-re-requesting docking permission etc.
- Finally getting docking permission, only for the game to change its mind and leaving me re-re-re-requesting docking permission.
- Finally getting stable docking permission, only for the game to change its mind about which bay I need to park in about 6927694924 before branding me as "loitering" and shooting me to death.
- Being shot to death randomly by the occasional idiot during re-re-re-re-requesting docking permission.
- Finally getting ready to park in a bay before the entire space station disappears.
- Repeating every single one of the above steps five times.
- Finally getting stable docking permission, confirmed bay, space station persists, game doesn't change its mind, make sure landing gear is deployed, go through the stupidly fiddly landing procedure and... nothing. The game just sat there for a few minutes, until my docking clearance ran out and I got shot to death by lasers.
At that point I gave up. So yeah, hoping that docking actually exists in the final game.
"
That's okay. I wasn't expecting something I'd barely call an Alpha in the "Premium Beta" stage. That's what you get for paying for early access. I would've pointed this out on Frontier's forums, but they clearly didn't want me to, so I didn't.
In August 2014, I got the first Beta. Clearly, after three months more development, stupid problems like that would've been fixed, right? Well, as I again wrote on Chaos Reborn forums:
"
So I got around to playing the Beta today. Flew up to the Eranin station and requesting docking... and it let me dock! Amazing, it's almost reached the stage I'd expect from an alpha! Bought some stuff, and set out to make a profit at Asellus. And then...
| DOCKING REQUEST SENT |
BEAGLE 2 LANDING: DOCKING CLEARANCE TIMED OUT. RESEND REQUEST.
| DOCKING REQUEST SENT |
BEAGLE 2 LANDING: DOCKING CLEARANCE TIMED OUT. RESEND REQUEST.
| DOCKING REQUEST SENT |
BEAGLE 2 LANDING: DOCKING CLEARANCE TIMED OUT. RESEND REQUEST.
| DOCKING REQUEST SENT |
BEAGLE 2 LANDING: DOCKING CLEARANCE TIMED OUT. RESEND REQUEST.
| DOCKING REQUEST SENT |
BEAGLE 2 LANDING: DOCKING CLEARANCE TIMED OUT. RESEND REQUEST.
For ten minutes, for a total of what must have been fifty or sixty attempts.
So I guess, one station down, 99,999,999 to go? At this rate, we'll be able to go there for real first.
"
That's okay. I wasn't expecting something I'd still barely call an Alpha in the "Beta" stage. That's what you get for paying for early access. Again, I would've pointed this out on Frontier's forums, but they probably would've banned me for it.
So, it's going to be difficult for me to play online with all these server hiccups, but that's okay, because it has an offline mode that I'll probably be using anyway when I see my mother or girlfriend. The offline mode will make it all okay.
Ahahaha. No.
Friday, 14th August, 2014. Elite Dangerous Newsletter #49 is released. And among all of the "ooh, look, we have shiny stuff!" announcements, there's a very subtle paragraph that many people failed to even notice on their first reading:
"
Going forwards, being online lets us constantly both curate and evolve the galaxy, with stories unfolding according to the actions of commanders. Exploration is also a key factor, too, and it is important that what a single player explores matches what other players explore whether single or multiplayer - a complex, coherent world - something we have achieved. Galaxy, story, missions, have to match, and it does mean the single player has to connect to the server from time to time, but this has the added advantage that everyone can participate in the activities that can happen in the galaxy. A fully offline experience would be unacceptably limited and static compared to the dynamic, ever unfolding experience we are delivering.
"
Now, it was expected the offline mode would've been limited and static. Of course you can't implement the nuances of an online universe offline. That's one of the trade-offs. Many, including myself, were looking forward to the "unacceptably limited and static" offline experience, much as we enjoyed the unacceptably limited and static offline experiences of the first three games in the series.
But what does "from time to time" mean? It means whenever you enter a new system, request docking permission, start trading etc., officially stated as "whenever you need to conduct a server moderated transaction". This is necessary at least every few minutes, and potentially more often than that.
After PR bullshit claiming that offline mode was "too hard", and confirmation from the head honcho himself that the game would require an effectively always-online connection, it was the last straw. I now have effectively no way to play this game; it doesn't work online, it doesn't work offline!
Applying for a refund for a game I was told I would be able to play but can't, I wrote this:
"
Frontier Developments,
I pledged ￡150 [that's a typo, should've read ￡105] towards the development of Elite: Dangerous, with the intention of participating in the Premium Beta and Private Backer forums, playing online when I can and being able to continue, or otherwise at least play, offline when I'm away from home.
I was unable to play any of the Premium Beta builds to the extent the game was advertised as at no point did the game allow me to dock, choosing instead to relocate the space station at random mid-docking. I was unable to play any of the Beta builds to the extent the game was advertised as, with one exception, I was unable to ever obtain docking permission due to server problems.
I was ostracised from the forums by the moderators when I suggested that trolls should not be dealt with by closing the threads the trolls want closed, and completely ignored when appealing a decision to suspend my account for explaining a joke.
I was annoyed at being prevented in playing the game pre-release and participating in the forums, but I was reassured that when released, regardless of everything that had previously happened, at least I would be able to play Elite: Dangerous offline and therefore experience a massive and rich (although not evolving) galaxy without encountering server problems. But as it turns out, I can no longer do this either.
This last point is in direct contradiction with the Kickstarter text, and similar text on the store, which reads:
"The above is the intended single player experience. However it will be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server. You won't get the features of the evolving galaxy (although we will investigate minimising those differences) and you probably won't be able to sync between server and non-server (again we'll investigate)."
It was clearly stated that it WILL be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server, and it was a big influence in my decision to back the game as I am often without an internet connection.
I feel cheated on every reward. The Premium Beta failed to give me the service I'd expect from an Alpha build. The Beta failed to give me the service I'd expect from an Alpha build. The Private Backer forums failed to give me the service I'd expect from a forum.
But most of all, the release version of Elite: Dangerous will not only fail to give me the service I'd expect from a game, but will also fail to give me the service Frontier Developments explicitly claimed it would give me.
As far as I'm concerned, you've already lost my trust. It was shaky this time last year, and every release has dampened it. The removal of offline play has massively damaged it beyond repair. I hope you understand that given my grievances towards every aspect of this project, I feel entitled to a full refund.
Thanks for reading; I wish you luck with the game and the backers who are not dissatisfied, and with the many other complaints, and hope that you will at least make one good decision here.
"
After the request had simply been left "Under Investigation" for a couple of weeks, and a standard stock reply confirming I was aware of what exactly had been removed, I received this:
"
Our records show that you backed the game before we committed to an offline mode. As such, we are unable to offer you a refund on this pledge unfortunately.
We're sorry that we cannot assist you further in this instance.
"
I'm sorry, what? I made a token pledge before you committed to an offline mode, massively increasing it afterwards. I'm punished because I wanted to show my support early? I responded:
"
A token pledge was made before the presence of an offline mode, to show support of a new Elite. The pledge was raised once it was announced that it was not "Elite MMO", and not required to be permanently online.
Furthermore, the timing of the initial pledge should not be relevant as there were opportunities to pull my pledge with no repercussions before the end of the Kickstarter campaign, something I certainly would have done had I known that offline mode was not to make it into the finished game. The product is not as advertised at the point of sale.
"
No response, and it's close to release now. I'm not waiting until after release to post this, so instead let's take a look at what Executive Producer Michael Brookes has to say:
"
The generation of the galaxy isn't the main issue (although it is part of it). The issue arises from the processes and data that changes as players interact with the world. The previous games were essentially static universes with some specific changes. For Elite: Dangerous aspects of the entire galaxy can be changes and there isn't an easy way to abstract that out. We were faced with a tough choice and it's not something we wanted to do, but to release a game that matched what we set out to do we had to go online online. I'd love to be able to make everyone happy but sometimes we have to make a hard choice as we have here.
"
That strikes me as bullshit. There is an easy way to abstract out the dynamic galaxy: don't include it. As I said before, it was good enough for the other three games.
"
And if it were that simple there wouldn't be a problem. The core vision for Elite: Dangerous was multiplayer, we've said that all along. The galaxy exists as an online entity, extracting that into an offline version that still works as game isn't simple. Missions are a good example, they are created based on the state of the galaxy and they feed back into the state of the galaxy there's a big level of difference between what we're doing now and what was in the previous games..
"
That strikes me as more bullshit. The galaxy doesn't have to exist as an online entity. Missions can be implemented in an offline galaxy, created based on the state of the galaxy, and fed back into the state of the galaxy. The player's computer would be its own server. This is how many other games do it, including the original games. I'm not going to claim that it's trivial, as it's far from that, but it's not so difficult that it would be worth the obvious backlash such a last-minute decision would make. Offline mode has been claimed for the past two years with no suggestion that it might not make the cut, and suddenly, one month before release, it's "too difficult".
This clearly isn't the actual reason behind it at all. Of course, you have to remember that Frontier Developments is a business. And like all businesses, their primary aim is to maximise profits. While many will be annoyed at the lack of offline play, I imagine few will receive refunds after backing or pre-ordering at Beta or higher. After all, Beta's already been released, too bad, no refunds because you've already had access to the game now.
Existing customers have already given them money, and as such they no longer matter. In fact, customers that have already paid cost less to support in both staff and server costs if they're not actually playing the game. But this is also about maximising profits for those who have not yet bought the game. Or, rather, trying to minimise the number of those pirating the game. In other words, always-online DRM, another Kickstarter claim that has been completely ignored.
By forcing you to connect online every time you play, it can authenticate you based on the account you also bought as part of the package. Those who pirated the game, cannot connect to this server, as pirating an account is somewhat more difficult. Instead, the game will be hacked, and will probably have offline play shortly after release (unless it really is "too difficult"!). So thanks but since you won't give me a refund then at the very least I'll grab the version that actually matches your Kickstarter claims when it's available. I paid for it, after all!
Of course, this isn't the first time David Braben has been rather shady in his business practices. In fact, it's not even the first time within the Elite series. As Ian Bell, the other guy behind the original masterpiece, wrote:
"
Firstly, he's used materials which are our joint copyright while claiming them to be entirely his. I really can't see why he refrained from the simple courtesy of putting "Elite elements copyright Bell and Braben, used with permission of the authors" on his Frontier titles. Morally, he's not giving credit were credit is due, either for the sake of self-aggrandisement or to somehow try and erode my joint ownership of the materials.
The second issue is less clear cut. I gave him the right to produce add ons and mission disks to the Elite sequel royalty free because I expected such to generate sales of the base game and also felt that such addons would be genuinely new materials for which I was not morally entitled to a percentage. I also agreed that a further sequel would be royalty free because at the time his plan was, or so I thought, to do addons for quite some time and any further sequel to be a wholly new concept. Shortly after "Frontier:Elite 2" David announced an extension disk "Frontier - The First Encounter" (CTW May 2 1994) but then this suddenly turned into a "sequel" to "F:E2" which to all intents and purposes replaces it. So suddenly the sequel to Elite on which I'm getting royalties is going to be replaced by a rewrite on which he proposes to pay me nothing while still using the Elite materials.
I think the reason he did this was that "F:E2" did not have the expansion potential for handling mission disks because it was rushed. I think David realised he had to effectively rewrite the game engine to give it proper expendability. He realised while doing so that by making it a sequel he'd get to charge more for it and could also take advantage of the sequel clause in our agreement to save paying me my share. Chris Sawyer's PC source was, I'm lead to believe, used as the basis for the conversion that earns him no royalties.
I'm still surprised at David's behaviour here. He could so easily have come to me and said "I'm going to significantly upgrade F:E2. I think a lower royalty would be appropriate.". I'd probably have accepted 5% pre development costs. But he just tried it on from the start.
The lesson I've learnt from this is that I'm a poor judge of character.
"
I hope you've learned some lessons from this too.
Lesson 1: Even if it's a sequel to a game you really really love made by one of the guys who made the original, don't trust anything. It will blow up in your face.
Lesson 2: Forum moderators are not always right; in fact, the more right they think they are, the less right they're likely to be. This applies for people generally.
Lesson 3: Don't engage with trolls. They make it easier for moderators to think they're right.
Lesson 4: When backing or pre-ordering, "Beta" refers to what would usually be called in the games industry as anywhere from "Prototype" to "Code Release", essentially any possible place in the game dev cycle. "Premium Beta", "Alpha", and various other terms mean the same thing.
Lesson 5: Kickstarter, and pre-ordering generally (Yeah, I know Kickstarter isn't technically pre-ordering, but let's face it, that's how most people use it) greatly reduces your chances of a refund when the advertised product turns out to not be what was advertised.
Lesson 6: If you are planning on presenting your own project on Kickstarter or IndieGoGo or some other crowdfunding website, remember all of this. Remember that if your project is a sequel or prequel or spin-off of another of your popular works, customers will have a pre-conceived idea of what that entails, and they'll expect the major features of the other work to be carried across. Remember that not everyone who asks to be a moderator on your forum is suitable for the job, and remember to relieve them of that job when they prove themselves unsuitable. Remember that there will always be idiots, and you will have to take care of them yourself. Remember that "Alpha" and "Beta" have generally agreed-upon meanings in the industry. An Alpha build has all major features implemented. It might be missing levels, or characters if they play similarly, or maybe some mechanics, but the major features are all there. A Beta build has all of the features implemented with only bugfixing and balancing remaining. These are the expectations of the state of your product when you use these terms. Remember that when you make a claim on Kickstarter, you will be expected to fulfil it (and remember that it always takes longer to finish than you think it will, so extend those deadlines! However long you think it will take, double it! Triple it! You will get complaints if you miss deadlines, but nobody will complain if it comes early).
And finally, remember that if you somehow manage to mess up all of these things, if you refund those affected then you'll still be better than Frontier Developments.
