Hilarious since the whole point of contention here is that their game won't have an offline mode, which means they're perfectly capable of keeping anyone they give a refund out of their game.

This refund criteria makes it very clear that they have no respect for their early adopters.

...but that would mean admitting it doubles as DRM!

Last time I checked the list, I realized I own no DRM-free games on Steam out of my 100+. So yes, there are DRM-free games on Steam, just don't expect to get [edit : I should say 'have'] one :)

I've just read RPS play experiences in E:D.

It's sad. I'd really have loved to play this game, in a single-player campaign.

Damn! It wouldn't be too hard to put a simple campaign, "Privateer-like", in this universe.

Which for i am thankful. Although i have half life 2 on steam i never tried this, mostly because i don't care much for it. :(

By the way, do most of the games on the drm-free steam list can be installed in a similar way?

Well. If anything it illustrates - somewhat - why publishers and investors are so stringent and dictate as much conditions as they do to the game studios they hire. I am not sure - I think Kickstarter is fine, but it probably just isn't very well suited for large teams and / or complex projects like games, necessarily, that have complicated methods of delivery, and can easily suffer from feature creep / are hard to project manage.

It works so much better with smaller scale projects - documentaries, films, art, photography, dance, etc. Where the scope is clear; there's little need to invent / develop new code / technology; or for raising funds for a engineering project / products and bringing them to a level that they can be manufactured / replicated easily enough. With all the latter aspects like DRM / code based vague promises and the like just don't come into the picture.

All in all I think Kickstarter has - so far - done more good than bad. The bad apples will always happen and are - always - a risk. Whether you crowd-fund something or act as a more traditional investor.

Yes, most. All DosBox games will work just fine. Otherwise, you can refer to this wiki page.

And keep in mind that some games require deleting steam_api.dll, which probably breaks EULA of not touching game files, so I'd say statement of them being DRM-free is a bit shady. Not that many of them tho.

I also have backed another project that failed to deliver. On that project, it never entered my mind to seek a refund. Why? Because the project lead was open and honest in explaining what went wrong and how it went wrong. I'm ok with that - that's a risk you take with KS, and sometimes things can go wrong, with the project failing to deliver for reasons beyond the control of the devs. Even if it was a mistake by the devs which lead to the failure, as long as it was an honest mistake, I've got no problem with it.

E: D is a far different kettle of fish - they are flat out refusing to deliver (as opposed to not being able to) and are spinning and bullshitting the reason for it. That, I am not ok with, and it is not a risk that I associate with KS.

I think the current situation of Elite could be compared to Godus. I've not backed that either, but what I've read the game has turned out as not only a little, but greatly different from what was originally promised and that has caused quite a bit of bad blood within the players, of who many think they were falsely promised a spiritual, modern Populous, when the devs actually did concentrate more on creating a monetized mobile game that lacks many of the promised features.

Though Godus is, and has been for a quite a while now, in Early Access and could stil change turn out more like it was promised to be in Kickstarter, but as it's been developed by a small company the changes for real game mechanics changes at this point are relatively slim.

That's true. For the other categories except games the success rate is probably extremely high. The problem is that the bad apple rate is low but there is nothing to stop it from getting higher. So far most creators maybe just were honest and hard working and clever enough guys to deliver what they promised. They deserve admiration. But at which point will people start promising anything just to get the money? After all this is business and somebody has to pay the mortgage.

I think a different KS where backers have more rights and their rights are somehow written down (at least the right to step back under certain circumstances) would be even better and do more good than the current KS. That's why KS should be improved.

For example here another idea: Instead of paying out the money all in one go to the publisher you pay it in steps and everytime backers can decide to withdraw if the projects course has changed too much. Of course they would lose what has been paid so far but at least the loss would be smaller and an incentive for the creators to stay on course.

Another idea would be to treat projects above a certain scale als pre-orders where you actually have to deliver what you promised. This would require that the game is already in a fairly advanced stadium but it can be done. Also this model would be disciplining the team to really deliver what they planned initially and not what they secretly wanted.

If you read the message of the guys here you see that they never really worked on an offline mode. They say that they first concentrated on the online part and then realized that an offline part is impossible for them. They only realize it close to the end because they always wanted to do the offline part and always had some hope for it (this is doubtful actually, it could be as well they never really wanted to do it). Whatever the reason they cannot keep the promise they made and additionally nothing bad happens for them. Other people seeing this could be tempted to try the same way.

Another possibility would be to let backers decide about such changes of course.

Another possibility would be to let backers participate in the financial success.

Another possibility would be for KS to clearly say that creators can do whatever they want with the money and the KS page is just a suggestion and in truth backing is a donation and everybody who expects anything should be careful and never expect a refund. Just to be as upfront and honest as possible. This would probably describe the current situation best although surprisingly many project indeed deliver what was promised.

As it is, the problem is that nobody really knows how accountable you can hold KS or the creators if anything goes wrong. Here something went wrong but what rights would the backers have because of this? How much financial compensation should they get? Under which circumstances should the creator be obliged to refund without fuss? All these things are unclear and KS is no help there either.

There's a new article on RPS about the E:D refunds.
It seems the author is not very pleased about the situation either.

The Brabenites are flaming anyone who is calling a scam on all this. No wonder that ISIS has managed to recruit so many followers to its homicidal cause. There are plenty of whackos and maniacs out there who are willing to go fanatical towards something that attracts their attention, wether it's an Imam or a "game's guru".


It's interesting to note that it seems this whole situation has made many Elite backers migrate their attention to Star Citizen now. If SC manages to fulfill its promises (DRM-free; good single-player campaign), it will smash Elite.

Then Elite's servers will shutdown in less than 5 years. And the game will disappear from the collective mind. :P

And a (very superficial, I think) article on Gamespot:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/online-only-elite-dangerous-sparks-refund-backlash/1100-6423711/

So superficial that they even got the news description wrong. :P
"Game's creator says offline single-player is a necessity." XD
Edit: Uploaded picture with the error.

A Beta is still a test phase and not the finished product or better expressed not a product that is released to the market, basically FD benefitted from backers that played the game online. I remember a time when developers where looking for Beta players and had to employ people for stress tests of the servers and to find bugs.

So people played the game to help the developers and this is the rope that prevents them from getting a refund...nice FD.

I think Frontier might have avoided this whole current shitstorm they're in right now if they would just have made to offline single player anouncements like this:

"We are sorry, but offline is not going to happen. We are refunding for everyone this is a dealbreaker."


I do think had they announced it like that they would have far less people asking for refunds than they have now, as I do believe some people are asking it because Frontier has managed to come out from this looking like total asses.

Now how the things are turning out they are doing more damage to themselves by not agreeing to those refunds. Everywhere I've seen news about this the discussion is very negative towards Frontier and the situation right now is such a PR disaster for them that it could potentially drive the whole company down.