Elite: Dangerous. I broke down.

[Bletchley_Geek]

I do agree with Jarhead, that Frontier has truly crafted a space combat and trading game that actually works and delivers where others' haven't (yet or ever).

But, to be very honest, this "I'm alright Jack, stuff it up" thing about the offline mode, and associated "white knighting" of Frontier is truly annoying. It might not be a deal breaker for a substantial part of the KS, alpha and beta backers, but it is significant. Tracking the threadnaught on the Frontier forums shows that indeed, it is not substantial, but it is significative and broad, including a couple forum moderators, as well as some very high-level KS backers (high-level as in thousands of pounds backing, which isn't too bad).

Regarding connectivity - your client checks up with the server:

* Every time a trade is made / the commodity market is checked
* Every time you check/buy/sell ship modules
* Every time you access the bulletin board for a mission, same for accepting and delivering
* Every time you pay a fine
* Every time you sell or buy stellar cartographic data
* Every time you request for docking
* Every time you refine minerals
* Every time you cash in a bounty
* Every time you jump into a system

this can be checked by looking at the logs that the Elite client generates, and the errors I have been getting during Beta. I thought that it also downloaded other stuff (regarding stellar bodies, etc.) but UGeek is right that those assets are generated, on demand, in your machine.

I have been tracking over the past few days how much data you get to download or upload after a 4 hour session, and in my case were a few megabytes. I am pretty sure there's a lot of bloat due to debugging code, etc. So I don't think those with limited data plans should care or worry about Elite:Dangerous making a serious dent in their monthly data budgets - this looks to me cheaper in terms of data than it is to spend 4 hours browsing heavily bloated sites or the Steam catalogue.

Yet it's not just logging - the game client talks to the server in a fairly regular basis, and indeed, this dual client/server architecture has been in place since Alpha 2. The "game" is conceptually a "browser", where you have cached most of the content, but the logic and interaction with the world is mediated by a server application. I have always been skeptical about the feasibility of a truly offline Elite experience because of this, but obviously, I had no real arguments looking at the very explicit mentions to it on Elite's EULA

https://store.zaonce.net/ed-eula/

8. In-Game Advertising

The Game may incorporate technology (which may be provided by Frontier or third party service providers engaged by Frontier (each a "Dynamic Advertising Provider")) which enables advertising to be uploaded into the Game on your PC, and changed while the Game is being played on-line.  In order that the Dynamic Advertising Provider is able to direct advertising appropriate to your Game and geographic region, as well as to the correct location within the computer game, certain non-personally identifiable data and information may be retrieved and retained by the Dynamic Advertising
Provider including your I.P. address, geographic location, in-game position, and information concerning the appearance of advertising visible during your gameplay (for example, the length of time an
item of advertising was visible, the dimensions of the advertisements). In addition, the Dynamic Advertising Provider may assign a unique identification number which is stored on your PC and which is used to monitor and calculate the number of views of dynamic advertising during gameplay. None of the information collected for this purpose including the identification number can be used to identify you.

The technology employed by Dynamic Advertising Providers may be located outside your country of residence (including outside of the European Union).


Where a Game incorporates dynamic advertising technology, the technology which serves the provision of dynamic in-game advertising is integrated within the Game. This means that if you do not want to receive dynamic advertising, you should only play the game when you are not connected to the Internet.

more comments on the EULA, since context seems to be quite important to understand this.

Going back to the "I'm allright Jack" thing. I have seen truly lamentable and unbelievable narrow minded comments on the Elite forums regarding this. Not having a cheap and reliable means of connecting to the Internet is less rare than some think. Indeed, you needed a connection to get the game in the first place. But that situation can change for shorter or longer periods of time. In my particular case, next week I am moving my family as I got a job in a different city. Being December and the Christmas season pretty much around the corner, I am not really banking on getting a cheap and reliable connection until mid January. That's two months that I'll have to rely on tethering my computer through my mobile phone if I want to play anything that requires some sort of online handshake. Rates of mobile data aren't particularly cheap in my part of the world.

That's one real world case of why the decision of dropping off-line support matters.

Another reason this may matter, is that by dropping off-line support, you're no longer "buying" a game. Or well, you're buying stuff in the same sense as you do when you buy books on the Kindle Store (this "buying" used to be referred as to "renting" before Silicon Valley Newspeak changed the meaning of "buying" for good). This is quite a deal breaker for many people out there, and I reckon quite a few persons on these forums. I am wondering whether they're going to bother distributing the boxed version of the "game" listed as a KS reward - it would probably be a strong contender to the "most meaningless KS reward ever".

Yet another reason that some people have got really vocal - and vociferous, and over the top, indeed - is that with dropping off-line the very clearly stated "DRM freedom" of Elite just flew out of the window. Always online is DRM, the most effective kind of DRM system, by the way.

And the last reason is in the portion of the EULA I quote above. Did you know about this Dynamic Advertising thing? I didn't - as it usually happens with these sh*tstorms, people start turning rocks and finding the most interesting stuff under them. Dropping the off-line mode, means that the "in-game advertising and tracking for commercial purposes" is now mandatory. And note the bit I highlighted in red - that means that whatever data it could be surmised at the present or future by analyzing your interactions with the game can be sold to third parties without Frontier needing your consent. There's people out there who actively avoid Facebook, and I wouldn't say they're just a tiny minority of fringe lunatics.

One can't help wondering about what was the driving force behind the decision of dropping off-line support. Just technical reasons? Too many counterexamples for that out there. Too complex to pull out correctly within the set shipping date? Perhaps. Off-line mode being something that worried a significant part of Frontier's shareholders (Frontier went public a while ago)? Who knows, but really, claiming that a profit can be made selling DLC, coffee mugs, meaningless vanity items, etc. around a video game, doesn't seem to me to be a business plan that would seduce a lot of capital. MMOs either go free to play with micro-transactions (with varying degrees of pay-to-win in there) or subscription-based. Frontier, cleverly, goes after selling advertisement space and demographics data.

So what is indeed, as Jarhead says, a massive accomplishment just got splashed with some very unpalatable crocks of sh*t.

[Bletchley_Geek]

Regarding connectivity, etc. Just another note for people interested in Elite.

The "server" - or more adequately, the network of computing nodes they deploy their server software on - lives in Ireland Amazon EC2 server farm. Which is not really a big deal if you happen to live in the UK (the UK and Ireland are directly connected). As you get away from the UK, the latency with the server grows accordingly. My particular case is quite extreme - I live in Australia. So whatever connection I establish with the server goes through Hawaii, US West Coast, US East Coast, Holland, the UK and finally Ireland. This translates in an average latency of about 300 ms - can get worse than that. Indeed, this latency is manageable when your interaction with the server isn't very "tight": browsing commodity markets, bulletin boards, shipyards etc. show some "blinking" and "waiting" but that is fine. The problem comes with the multi-player matchmaking - the server decides which clients get grouped together, and then whatever player-to-player interaction is handled in a peer-to-peer way. This, in my case, translates that I hardly see any other fellow human players, and I get occasional massive stuttering on stations and Nav Beacons (turns out that I have an easier time breaking free from player interdiction, because the server kicks me out of the instance since it finds "unfair" that I have such latency).

Of course this isn't something is going to get fixed - it is an accident of geography, so to speak. So it has become apparent to me, that unless I move at some point in the future back to Europe, I'd rather play the game Solo Online.

[mikeck]

Concerning their decision to remove the off-line mode. It is possible that during the substantial beta testing, Frontier found that the completely separated universe in off-line mode breaks down? Has anyone seen a rep from frontier ask why they did it?

Also, if the game tries to access the server during a jump into the system or something and fails to connect can you keep playing does the game get you from continuing until connection can be established?

I haven't had a problem so far but I have a pretty good Internet connection

[Grim.Reaper]

Concerning their decision to remove the off-line mode. It is possible that during the substantial beta testing, Frontier found that the completely separated universe in off-line mode breaks down? Has anyone seen a rep from frontier ask why they did it?

Also, if the game tries to access the server during a jump into the system or something and fails to connect can you keep playing does the game get you from continuing until connection can be established?

I haven't had a problem so far but I have a pretty good Internet connection

Link to an article where some info stated by the company...basically said they could not fulfill their vision with offline.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/elite-dangerous-drops-its-promised-offline-mode/1100-6423629/

[Bletchley_Geek]

Concerning their decision to remove the off-line mode. It is possible that during the substantial beta testing, Frontier found that the completely separated universe in off-line mode breaks down? Has anyone seen a rep from frontier ask why they did it?

This is Braben's statement right from the newsletter

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=dcbf6b86b4b0c7d1c21b73b1e&id=cea4f4cd56&e=a3a4e2a920

The basic fact of being able to interact online with our community during development has been tremendous. Just as in a film, based on feedback some of the things we originally thought would work have been left 'on the cutting room floor'. We have also added unplanned features which I think are fundamentally key to the experience, and have made the game all the better.  For example shifting design emphasis towards fantastic major new features such as supercruise, outposts and multiple ship ownership, to name just a few.

We have also been able to create a connected experience which lets you play your own story whilst in a dynamic, ever unfolding galaxy that is constantly reacting to what you and every other player is doing, be that trading, combat, exploration or missions. This has become fundamental to the whole experience.

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.

David, as the lead designer, does indeed have the right to cut away from the game whatever he isn't pleased with. But when you look at the whole thing, you can't help wondering to what extent David's assessment was influenced by concerns which aren't stated in the newsletter. Or in less words, in the absence of an incentive, what's the point of trying hard to deliver. It is interesting that the gameplay logic which relies on talking to the server isn't featured in this statement - David knows pretty well that the server could be replaced either by a process running in the same machine as the client, with minimal to no changes in the code (it would be a matter of making sure that the server is up, and setting the server address to localhost).

But in the same way David is entitled to shape the game to fit his vision, people is entitled to be less than happy with his decision.

Also, if the game tries to access the server during a jump into the system or something and fails to connect can you keep playing does the game get you from continuing until connection can be established?

Not in my case - it kicks you out of the game (to the main menu).  I have one open ticket at the moment, where this was happening, but the client was knocked out (the client froze with the main menu music playing, but not accepting any input). The dev asked me "is this happening to you often", so I am wondering whether the disconnection is working as designed, or he was referring to the client freeze.

[Nefaro]

I picked up Elite Dangerous this afternoon.  The Beta version, since the planned final wipe is this weekend.   

Dunno what kind of condition this thing is in, or whether I'll mess with it much over the week.  But if the real start is the 22nd, as planned, then I wasn't gonna be saving anything by waiting a few more days.

[JudgeDredd]

It's been mentioned many times in this thread Nef...the game is in a far better and complete state than a lot of games nowadays.

I'm not sure about this connection thing...but I've paid my money now - so what comes, comes.

[Nefaro]

It's been mentioned many times in this thread Nef...the game is in a far better and complete state than a lot of games nowadays.

I'm not sure about this connection thing...but I've paid my money now - so what comes, comes.

I expected it to be a multi-player game, pretty much an MMO, so the offline part getting cut didn't surprise me.

I'd only be concerned about how well the servers hold up, along with latency and connection issues for anyone not in Europe.  The more "hops" my connection has to make in order to reach their server farm in Ireland, the higher the chance of disconnects and latency spikes. 

[undercovergeek]

ive read it 1000s of times and im still not sure i understand it but the servers arent doing the MP part of the game like a traditional MMO

[Nefaro]

ive read it 1000s of times and im still not sure i understand it but the servers arent doing the MP part of the game like a traditional MMO

Doesn't matter.  If we see "Failed To Connect" or "Connection Failed" errors often enough, there will be a revolt.

I'm thinking of bad stuff along the lines of Ubi's fiasco of a DRM system, when it has reportedly had issues checking in with the server regularly using this same kind of setup.

[Father Ted]

Doesn't matter.  If we see "Failed To Connect" or "Connection Failed" errors often enough, there will be a revolt.

Yeah, but they've got your money.  I foresee an almighty shitstorm when (if) Star Citizen gets a release.  The whole concept of buying stuff that doesn't exist yet is crazy.  I admit I ponied up $45 for SC as I thought it a reasonable punt, but I know people who've spent hundreds.  I wonder how they'll feel when they realise it's just another video game?

[Nefaro]

Doesn't matter.  If we see "Failed To Connect" or "Connection Failed" errors often enough, there will be a revolt.

Yeah, but they've got your money.  I foresee an almighty shitstorm when (if) Star Citizen gets a release.  The whole concept of buying stuff that doesn't exist yet is crazy.  I admit I ponied up $45 for SC as I thought it a reasonable punt, but I know people who've spent hundreds.  I wonder how they'll feel when they realise it's just another video game?

I also get the impression that Elite will be spewing out a steady stream of DLC.  So it's probably in their interest to keep their connectivity situation under control if they want to retain their customer base for such future sales.  Extra motivation is good.  I'd relate E:D to something like Guild Wars 2, perhaps. 

I wrinkled my nose at the first details of Star Citizen.  Haven't even bothered looking into it after that.   

[Bletchley_Geek]

ive read it 1000s of times and im still not sure i understand it but the servers arent doing the MP part of the game like a traditional MMO

You're right UGeek - Elite is quite groundbreaking in that respect. Let me try to explain how the basic idea works and how it compares with traditional MMOs:

In traditional MMOs, PVP matchmaking requires that both players are in the same "shard", "instance", "level" or "room". In some games this sharding is quite obvious - WOW for instance - and in others it's presented in a way that the player perceives it as seamless - as Eve On-Line does, where the "instance" encompasses up to 500 cubic kilometers around any fixed object like a station, a stargate, etc. - but sharded nonetheless.

The players' actions are submitted to the server, and the actions are resolved by putting them on a "queue". This queue is processed in a first-in first-out order, and the server resolves each action in turn, broadcasting the results to all players in the same "room". This has several implications: if you have high latency, your actions will be resolved after those of players with lower latency, and high-server load, that is, there are lots of incoming players' actions to process, there might be significant delays in the server getting back to you or worse, the server might decide to limit the number of actions to be processed (so your input is "rescheduled" to some point in the future, at which you might well be already dead).

Of course, there are many, many variants on this pattern, that try to improve the fairness and robustness of player-to-player interactions. One typical way of making this process as fair as possible, is to group players' actions in "frames", resolving and applying players' actions effects as if they were effectively being resolved simultaenously (so two players shooting at each other can get both a headshot if they fired at the same "server time"). Games like Eve On-line go well beyond this - and just recently - have quite sophisticated algorithms to ensure a reasonable degree of fairness in how players' actions are resolved. In Eve, they introduced a pretty nifty system that "dilates" time - that is, the server doesn't get back to anyone until all actions submitted within a given fixed time frame are resolved. So the game becomes a slideshow of sorts, but for everyone.

In Elite, as I understand it, the server role in the player-to-player interaction is to 1) determine whether the latency between two groups of players is low enough and 2) create an "instance" - called "islands" in Elite - dynamically for those two groups to interact directly. This, on paper, is very neat. You do away with requiring the quite massive processing capabilities that Eve requires. It also, in theory if the matchmaking algorithms and heuristics get it right, ensure that you'll enjoy a low-latency player-to-player experience. The thing is that this is quite hard to pull out right. First, the server needs to "calibrate" the latencies between the players. This can take some time  - depending on the latency between each client and the server - and may be very unreliable due to stuff happening in the Internet at large. And second, once the server "pairs" the players and sends them the data describing the island, it all depends on the two players' machines and the particular conditions of the network connecting them. Which are dynamic - the assessment the sever made to match two players' might turn out not to be so good after some time is elapsed.

It is not surprising that Elite dev team is needing so much effort to pull out just about right - it's very complex! And there's a substantial body of knowledge in computer networking that says that this can't work anywhere but in a curated network (like a local area network), and when the peer-to-peer exchange involves a group of n clients it can't just work efficiently. But of course, it offers massive savings in infrastructure. If they manage to have this system working, they could well write quite a few research papers on it, as it would be truly ground breaking.

[Nefaro]

Started it up to begin mapping buttons.

Ugh.  I've done it so much recently that I didn't have much stomach for d!cking with it at the moment.  Have had a nightmare of a time trying to get my CH setup working in the WOFF campaign, thus far with no success.  But I'd like to shake out my Elite noobidity by the weekend.  Onward procrastination!

[JudgeDredd]

Started it up to begin mapping buttons.

Ugh.  I've done it so much recently that I didn't have much stomach for d!cking with it at the moment.  Have had a nightmare of a time trying to get my CH setup working in the WOFF campaign, thus far with no success.  But I'd like to shake out my Elite noobidity by the weekend.  Onward procrastination!

One of the really cool things about mapping buttons in this is buttons can be "re-used". So for example you can map the POV to look around and then when you are docked, you can map the POV to access the menus.

But I agree...mapping is a gamers nightmare nowadays.  >:D

Thank god DCS eventually allowed the user access to the key config whilst in flight. I'm forever forgetting key bindings.