Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
No, they actually said they're "investigating the possibility" of adding an offline mode. That's code speak for "we'll wait to tell you NO, until after we get your money".
No promises were made.
There's no measure that's more anti-consumer than "always online" . "Always online" locks the user base out of the game completely if there are any issues with the servers or the user's connection.
It's just a glorified form of rental and a remote kill switch at the core of the game.
Don't support "always online" games.
Exactly. It would be detrimental to sales in the initial launch window to outright declare no offline mode is possible.
This is the reason why they didn't promise offline mode outright and they're instead "investigating the possibility" :).
Once you behave like a good little money bag and give them the cash the results of their "investigation" will be that no offline support is possible. The old bait and switch.
Again, there's absolutely no measure that is more anti-consumer than "always online". Not even Denuvo. At least Denuvo doesn't lock you out of the game completely if the servers are overcrowded.
Mind you that probably most of these deeply anti-consumer decisions (always online, no workshop support, microtransactions, high price) are driven by the extremely greedy publisher, not by the development team. It's important to make that distinction.
Exactly. You could be fooled ONCE by Evolve and maybe blame 2K. But when you see what they're doing with B4B, it's entirely TRS fault and you can tell that Evolve was their mistake, not only the publisher.
Maybe they've changed their minds about offline support and will actually include it ?
I don't mind denuvo as much as I mind crappy "always online" stuff that locks users out of the game when the servers are hammered. There absolutely nothing worse in a game than online only requirements for playing solo.
You still require to be online for Denuvo to work mate. If it works at all.
Correct but if it had an offline mode and only Denuvo, the online activation of Denuvo is much less frequent.
Depending on the title, weeks can pass until a new Denuvo activation is required. I'm not defending Denuvo, don't get me wrong.
But at least it doesn't lock you out of the game if the servers are offline or overwhelmed.
Anyway if they reconsider and add offline support I'll buy the game. If not, I'll definitely skip it.
Can you name any good online games that came out in the last 2-3 years that isn't always on?
Im totally against that as well but if you look at the gaming market there aren't many games to play if you boycott all always on games.
Saying this, 99,9% of all singleplayer games don't catch my interest I want to play with friends or make new ones. If I want to talk to dumb ai's without feedback I would be sitting on Twitter.