Being paranoid about that simply has no foundation.
But generally speaking, 3rd party tools (or at least Inara) provide enough privacy settings so nobody needs to feel uncomfortable and being watched. All important information like flight log, mission log, credits log, etc. can be set for his/her eyes only and nobody else will see it. Being paranoid about that simply has no foundation.
I think this issue is unrelated to any tool or even to Elite itself. Many games are having some competitive aspect and some players simply want to become best, or win or overcome the challenge. Which is perfectly alright. Unfortunately, some of them are not afraid to play unfair and use whatever tool they have to their disposition, doesn't matter if it breaks the ToS (like various aim-bots in FPS games, etc.). I see the situation with botting no different - players want to win, but do not care if they win a fair way. If they use the information right in the game, pen and paper or third party tool to get some data, it doesn't play a role, because the primary reason why they are willing to break ToS is their desire to win at all costs.
Yep, to some extent and under a specific conditions and for a limited time (until relay change the hash), it's possible (for a limited set of information). It just isn't a very effective method how to track somebody and certainly not unless you are able to make such observations (like being in the game at the right place, at the right time).
Inara had this information displayed just to the squadron members, as there was a presumption that squadron members would like to play together and would like to know where other members are and the privacy settings were intended just for the public. It was not an issue, but designed that way. But apparently many squadrons do not trust their members enough so there were requests to change that behavior (and so it was changed).
ABA? Anti-Botting Agency? Ask Braben Anything?
You realise for some of us this place is as much the game as the game?
I get what you're saying, but I think plenty of games manage progression without grind. Grind, to me, is pushing through unenjoyable things to make it to content you like, not just working towards something. Subnautica does things well with pacing. Every time you need something new, you also explore somewhere new so it's fun, and get a little upgraded so you can do better next time (unless you want a megabase, that IS a grind). Factory style games let you automate your current repetitive cycle to get to, well, a new one- but you're not still doing the same thing. I love ED, but the nature of a delivery mission hasn't really changed since I was in the Pilots Federation district!
Subnautica, no, and for the amount that packs in to each hour that would be a crazy amount of content, sure. Factorio? Sure. I mean, I haven't, I have played it for about the same length of time as ED (~1000h), but plenty of people love it and have played more. Crucially, none of that was a grind, it was always me trying to build some new contraption to automate me a stage further.
True, but it doesn't follow that an open ended game has to be a grind either. I have plenty of high 100s+ games that weren't grindy, rare gems though they may be. It is a testament to the things Elite does very, very well that I still did grindy things in it. It is unique among games I love- it allowed me to vividly, convincingly experience my long-standing fantasy of being a starship pilot and also made me decide that I am glad my actual career is more interesting!
Yeah, I've seen this said before, but they don't often differ. That's still repeatedly running the same few ruin designs, just with more supercruise and hyperspace time. Besides, when a sense of progression toward a goal is a major motivating factor, you can't blame players for taking shortcuts- it's just poor design to leave them in. It was like people arguing that mining had to be well paid because combat was more fun- why put a career in a game if it isn't fun??
Elite articles so hot right now.
