Posted November 19, 2014

JiminyJickers
Ayyy!!!
Registered: Oct 2010
From New Zealand

HereForTheBeer
Positive Patty
Registered: Oct 2009
From United States
Posted November 19, 2014


Oh, and we'll see commercials for the holographic edition of the complete series of Futurama, which will turn out to be a documentary as everything in the show comes to fruition.
Post edited November 19, 2014 by HereForTheBeer

YaTEdiGo
Vegan Gamer
Registered: Apr 2009
From Taiwan
Posted November 19, 2014
Good for them, I am not interested in online games beyond the time I spend on COD or BF games on consoles. I dont play online games on PC.

jamotide
Jack Keane 2016!
Registered: Jul 2011
From Netherlands

Jinh_Molton
New User
Registered: Oct 2012
From Other
Posted November 19, 2014
I am really glad I did not back this, some weeks ago I was thinking about getting the Beta. I decided to wait for the final release and bought Starpoint Gemini here on GOG. Now I see it was the right choice.

JiminyJickers
Ayyy!!!
Registered: Oct 2010
From New Zealand
Posted November 19, 2014



Post edited November 19, 2014 by Ravenvolf

forbidden5
New User
Registered: Dec 2010
From Germany
Posted November 19, 2014
The "unfortunate" timing and the reports of not honouring refund requests seem really scummy.
I thought I'd been burned once, when pre-ordering an independent title (before KS took off) that eventually took the route of Steam exclusivity. Unlike this project, getting my money refunded worked without an issue back then. It's saddening to hear that the negative experience of such major decisions can be made even worse for some.
There are possibly some issues with Kickstarter, or they're really desperate for the money here, else I don't see denying refund request as a sensible course of action.
I thought I'd been burned once, when pre-ordering an independent title (before KS took off) that eventually took the route of Steam exclusivity. Unlike this project, getting my money refunded worked without an issue back then. It's saddening to hear that the negative experience of such major decisions can be made even worse for some.
There are possibly some issues with Kickstarter, or they're really desperate for the money here, else I don't see denying refund request as a sensible course of action.

Trilarion
New User
Registered: Jul 2010
From Germany
Posted November 19, 2014

I think this view is unfair and disadvantages the backer and if I would have backed them I would be angry at them. Hopefully this will result in a lot of bad PR and people who are affected are thinking twice about supporting them ever again. They are probably not very trusthworthy.

tomimt
Optimum rat
Registered: May 2010
From Finland
Posted November 19, 2014


I think this view is unfair and disadvantages the backer and if I would have backed them I would be angry at them. Hopefully this will result in a lot of bad PR and people who are affected are thinking twice about supporting them ever again. They are probably not very trusthworthy.
I know many people still look KS as some sort of pre-order and many devs are to blame from that as well. But in many cases it really isn't pre-order as much of act of good faith. You trust your money to a project and you trust the devs to do their job well. Sometimes they deliver what they promised, sometimes they omit things from the game because of unforseen developement difficulties.
It is unfortunate that such a big feature as offline has been axed. A lot of people pledged because of that. At the same time Frontier did themselves a disservice when they did sell the game later with a promise of offline. What they should have done in KS was to tell that they would look into it, but not promise it. They did mistakes there and they really aren't handeling the situation as well as they should. But at the same time KS backers should really acknowledge, that no matter how much they give, they aren't pre-purchasing a game with set features. They are purchasing something that MIGHT be.

jamotide
Jack Keane 2016!
Registered: Jul 2011
From Netherlands
Posted November 19, 2014


tomimt
Optimum rat
Registered: May 2010
From Finland
Posted November 19, 2014
It really isn't violation of KS terms. Their terms are so vague, that the it can be argued in any direction, so in the end as guidelines KS terms are useless. What would be needed is some solid court case about the matter of what must be delivered on the base of a sales pitch.
In the end the whole thing is okay in KS terms, as Frontier will deliver a game. It might not have all the features, but they will deliver a game, that is reasonably close to what they intentented. But just like always, intentionts are not met goals and KS acknowledges that and they have covered their own base with that. If a backer isn't happy with the end product that is, from KS POV, between the backer and the project.
In the end the whole thing is okay in KS terms, as Frontier will deliver a game. It might not have all the features, but they will deliver a game, that is reasonably close to what they intentented. But just like always, intentionts are not met goals and KS acknowledges that and they have covered their own base with that. If a backer isn't happy with the end product that is, from KS POV, between the backer and the project.

ashwald
insert title here
Registered: Jun 2012
From Greece
Posted November 19, 2014

This is glorious. Let the apologists like Mich testify!


jamotide
Jack Keane 2016!
Registered: Jul 2011
From Netherlands
Posted November 19, 2014
Of couse it is a violation, they are not delivering a DRM free physical edition. And only because they CHOOSE not to, they make no effort to resolve this in any way. That violates paragraph 4.

tomimt
Optimum rat
Registered: May 2010
From Finland
Posted November 19, 2014
What they are violating is their own original design idea, not KS terms. KS acknowledges that product funded through them are not necessarily 100% match to the origial pitch. Frontier violates what they themselves originally sold to the backers, but as far KS goes, in their eyes they have delivered the product, as it will be in the hands of the backers and not cancelled. In the eyes of KS it is a case between Fronties and the backers, not a case between KS, backers and Frontier.

jamotide
Jack Keane 2016!
Registered: Jul 2011
From Netherlands
Posted November 19, 2014

They are clearly violating that since they are making ZERO effort to resolve anything.
No they have not, as they CHOOSE not to deliver a DRM free edition.