The EULA and Data Farming

[Armour]

That is a premise, not a purpose. I think you would have a hard time arguing any single objective purpose of this game.

The purpose of the game is to provide the engine/mechanics/models that enable players to "be" the pilot, surely? What other purpose is required?

Neither was it listed as something in WoW, LoL, Hearthstone, or any other game. Heck, even physical sports have meta. It's a natural part of gaming because it's strategy that happens out side of the game itself. If you don't want to be a part of it, don't be.

So the pro-cheating argument is "stuff happens, deal with it". Okay. We know where we all stand.

Absolutely, but I think those who want to call it cheating hold the burden off proof, no?

Not at all.
You take advantage of in-game information that your pilot has no access to, given the level of communication connectivity in the Elite universe. This allows you to gain an advantage over those who play the game without external help. The process of doing this causes you to voluntarily assimilate into a kind of Borg hivemind. The swarming behaviour that results causes the shared galaxy simulation to be skewed in a way that natural play dynamics would not achieve. You, therefore, have the burden of proof to explain how that's not cheating.

You have to explain how it's cheating

See above.

the whole "it's not in the game yet" argument holds little weight. It's the sort of purist attitude that does nothing but stifle innovation. I've seen 3rd party developers make apps that ultimately make their way (if nothing more than conceptually) into a game. But if that developer hadn't made it in the first place it would never have been on the road map.

Fluff and nonsense. Supposition and weak rationalisations do not an argument make. Again, your default position is "stuff happens, deal with it", which doesn't even resemble an argument.
I repeat: I proposed in-game trading tools, as did many others. The developers are well aware what they are and how they can be used. The fact that they aren't in the game yet tells us one of two things. Either they aren't meant to be, or they haven't been judged to be a priority. Either way, the game will not currently be set up to deal with their impact, so using third-party versions of such tools runs contrary to the current version of the game.

How does working together, i.e aggregating data, constitute cheating? It's a multiplayer game. Although playing with others might not be your "purpose" in playing, but it is, with out a doubt, other peoples' purpose.
Working with others to achieve a common goal is a farcry from cheating. Analyzing statistics isn't cheating, it's strategy.

Again, see above. I am happy to play with others in the spirit of the game as is, not in spite of it.

 

[HughJanaconda]

10 bucks says, that every poster here who is against 3rd party tools, or sharing trading data, has peeked at the Rare Commodities List.

Hypocrites, all.

 

[Armour]

10 bucks says, that every poster here who is against 3rd party tools, or sharing trading data, has peeked at the Rare Commodities List.

Okay, when are you going to pay up? I haven't. In fact, I try and steer clear of threads where trading locations are being discussed, or where discoveries are being shown off. If there's stuff to do, I want to do it. Making the game less challenging does not appeal.

 

[HughJanaconda]

Okay, when are you going to pay up?

I dunno, I'm not having much luck with these $10 bets lately.

I haven't. In fact, I try and steer clear of threads where trading locations are being discussed, or where discoveries are being shown off. If there's stuff to do, I want to do it. Making the game less challenging does not appeal.

I understand that POV, but when hunting for systems selling rares = finding a needle in a billion haystacks, I'll be checking the crowdsourced list thanks.

 

[Tuzmaal]

10 bucks says, that every poster here who is against 3rd party tools, or sharing trading data, has peeked at the Rare Commodities List.

Hypocrites, all.

Never done a single Rare run, try again and thanks for your money.

 

[Armour]

I understand that POV, but when hunting for systems selling rares = finding a needle in a billion haystacks, I'll be checking the crowdsourced list thanks.

Well, they are supposed to be rare. If I find one, It'll be an event. Why would you want to make the extraordinary mundane?

It's funny to me. Some of the very same folks who claim to appreciate this game's lack of hand holding compared to a lot of modern gaming are essentially turning it into Space Skyrim for themselves, by using their cheat sheets to populate the map with virtual "rare"/crowdsourced quest markers that indicate where all the opportunity lies, then they swarm across the stars like a plague of locusts, trying to consume all profits and loot in their paths. These will probably be the same people complaining that the game is boring and that there's nothing to do. Oh well, whatever, never mind.

 

[Lasse B.]

Doesn't this bit from the EULA

describe crowdsourced trading tools pretty well?

That describes everything running on a computer and the hardware itself. Your colors are likely to be off due to a different color setup of your screen. You might be using a mouse with more or less buttons than what the developers had in mind when setting up the experience. And since no process can ever run without influencing any and all other processes, at least through the task scheduler, you'd need to make sure you're running the same software with the same configuration as well. The easier solution would be to buy a computer and peripherals configured to run nothing but E from FD themselves.

PC has always been about customizing the experience to a degree. Those who don't want that should stick with consoles, both players and developers, but even then they'd be facing different audio and video configurations.

 

[Tru]

Well, they are supposed to be rare. If I find one, It'll be an event. Why would you want to make the extraordinary mundane?

It's funny to me. Some of the very same folks who claim to appreciate this game's lack of hand holding compared to a lot of modern gaming are essentially turning it into Space Skyrim for themselves, by using their cheat sheets to populate the map with virtual "rare"/crowdsourced quest markers that indicate where all the opportunity lies, then they swarm across the stars like a plague of locusts, trying to consume all profits and loot in their paths. These will probably be the same people complaining that the game is boring and that there's nothing to do. Oh well, whatever, never mind.

There is no argument in the world that is going to convince you of anything when your mind is already made up. Being philosophically opposed to external tools is one thing... But unless you have a better, realistic approach THAT IS ENFORCABLE... then you are simply projecting your issues onto others. You are the one doing the whining.

FD are the maker and enforcer of rules. If you do not think that people should be able to use external tools, than you should take this up with them. But, as has been mentioned countless times before... The first thing you need to do is define what you consider to be "cheating." Is having a brain capable of remembering prices from previous stations cheating? How about writing them down on a piece of paper? Or Typing them into an excel spreadsheet? Or a Google Doc? How are you going to detect and enforce any of this? How about creating a more organized tool for your own personal use (still not detectable)? The simple fact is that people are capable of organizing data, and also sharing data with others, with absolutely no way of being detected by FD. The logical next step is to put these two things together and create tools that both organize your own data as well as sharing it with others. There is no reason why this needs to be some clandestine thing when neither of the two aspects are illegal or enforceable even if they were.

Then there is the argument that players shouldn't use these tools even if they are acceptable under the EULA. First, if you don't like them or don't find them beneficial, then that is a fantastic reason why YOU should not use them. Since we all have a brain and are capable of making our own decisions, we can each make our own judgements about their benefits and act accordingly. But the need to use tools is a vastly different argument from the right to create them.

Quite honestly, I do use Slopey's tool, but I find it to be of VERY limited usefulness right now. As an experienced trader, I realize that I will never find a great trade route simply from using the tool alone. Instead, I use it to potentially save me a from a wasted trip to a useless station. If somebody has been there before and the tool has up-to-date info on the station, I can potentially save myself 5-10 minutes of time. But in the end, I still know that I will have to spend most of my time flying from station to station discovering the prices for myself. However, for noobs or less serious traders, the tool can be a great way of quickly finding reasonable trade routes with good (but not great) profitability. This alone makes the tool useful (even if you or I may not reap these benefits).

At a more fundamental, basic economic level... I have a nice long detailed post earlier in this thread outlining the flaws of this game's economy (which are likely too complex to be fixed). I will avoid repeating most of that here, but there is one key point that is worth reiterating: Trade functions specifically because of information. Producers know that their is a demand for their goods (or at least a perceived demand) before deciding to produce them. And consumers adjust their activities based on prices and the availability of said goods. FD's notion that individual traders should need to fly around to each station to gather information is flagrantly unrealistic. ED is their game, and they can do with it as they please. But since we humans do live in reality, and make (generally) rational decisions, we are going to optimize our ability to trade even if FD are taking a peculiar stance on it. Just because they have taken an incorrect stance on the nature of trade does not mean that we players need to act like dumb dumb's just to support their views. The fact is that information drives trade, and tools enhance our ability to gather and organize said information.

 

[Armour]

There is no argument in the world that is going to convince you of anything when your mind is already made up. Being philosophically opposed to external tools is one thing... But unless you have a better, realistic approach THAT IS ENFORCABLE... then you are simply projecting your issues onto others. You are the one doing the whining.

Attack the man not the ball, eh?

FD are the maker and enforcer of rules. If you do not think that people should be able to use external tools, than you should take this up with them. But, as has been mentioned countless times before... The first thing you need to do is define what you consider to be "cheating." Is having a brain capable of remembering prices from previous stations cheating? How about writing them down on a piece of paper? Or Typing them into an excel spreadsheet? Or a Google Doc? How are you going to detect and enforce any of this? How about creating a more organized tool for your own personal use (still not detectable)?

I think I defined what I personally consider cheating in this context perfectly well in a previous post. None of these things could be called cheating, since your information base is limited to what you have seen and remembered/noted.

The simple fact is that people are capable of organizing data, and also sharing data with others, with absolutely no way of being detected by FD.

That's probably not true, in fact. There are almost certainly traffic analysis methods that would indicate over a period of time which players are part of a crowdsourced data swarm and which ones are not. But that's beside the point.

...tools that both organize your own data as well as sharing it with others...neither of the two aspects are illegal or enforceable

I agree that there's no practical way that you, I or Frontier Developments can stop such cheating. Being able to cheat with impunity doesn't mean it's no longer cheating though. If it offends the cheats to be called out on it, perhaps that's more of their issue than it is mine?

we all have a brain and are capable of making our own decisions, we can each make our own judgements about their benefits and act accordingly

I agree that we all have a brain. Some people don't appear to have enough faith in the capability of their own on an individual basis, it seems, and seek safety in numbers. That's a decision for them to make, and for me to ridicule if I see fit.

Quite honestly, I do use Slopey's tool, but I find it to be of VERY limited usefulness right now. As an experienced trader, I realize that I will never find a great trade route simply from using the tool alone. Instead, I use it to potentially save me a from a wasted trip to a useless station. If somebody has been there before and the tool has up-to-date info on the station, I can potentially save myself 5-10 minutes of time. But in the end, I still know that I will have to spend most of my time flying from station to station discovering the prices for myself. However, for noobs or less serious traders, the tool can be a great way of quickly finding reasonable trade routes with good (but not great) profitability. This alone makes the tool useful (even if you or I may not reap these benefits).

I agree that such tools might save you a wasted trip. But I figure that wasted trips are part and parcel of trading. You're not really risking much otherwise. If trading is simply a matter of going to the next quest marker to pick up the profitable loot, what's the point? Why not just have a "make money" button and a timer, like Farmville or something?
Also, It may appear to be beneficial to new players. A lot of them can't aim too well either, and have trouble taking evasive manoeuvres in combat. Perhaps an aimbot or a shield hack would help them too?

FD's notion that individual traders should need to fly around to each station to gather information is flagrantly unrealistic.

That may be the case in the internet connected world of today. But what about the one in the age of sail, when merchant ships travelled the globe and the fastest way to transmit most information was to physically write it down and take it to a location? Given the FTL comms restrictions in the Elite universe, surely that model is the one the game should represent, rather than your one of a space trader with a magic Bloomberg terminal?

ED is their game, and they can do with it as they please. But since we humans do live in reality, and make (generally) rational decisions, we are going to optimize our ability to trade even if FD are taking a peculiar stance on it. Just because they have taken an incorrect stance on the nature of trade does not mean that we players need to act like dumb dumb's just to support their views. The fact is that information drives trade, and tools enhance our ability to gather and organize said information.

And cheating is still cheating. Even if it's easy.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

Armour, your argument is analogous to saying that training for a soccer/futbol game is cheating because it's not THE purpose of the game. Practice and strategy may not be the purpose of a game, but they do bring meaning to the game.

Arguably, the only real "purpose" of any game is to entertain the user, but that doesn't mean other subjective purposes can't also come from the same game that we all play.

I understand that a line should be drawn somewhere when the entertainment of one user disrupts the entertainment of others. But that's a hard point to argue when the game allows pirating as legitimate professions.

Yes, cheating is cheating regardless of difficulty and enforcement. And I would definitely consider botting as cheating. But playing ED as a Space Road Trucker simulator while using statistics data from an aggregate source isn't botting. It may not be the puritan's way to play Elite, but it's not cheating.

 

[Armour]

Armour, your argument is analogous to saying that training for a soccer/futbol game is cheating because it's not THE purpose of the game.

How is that remotely analogous to the use of crowdsourced cheat sheets?

Practice and strategy may not be the purpose of a game, but they do bring meaning to the game.

Or the game itself brings the meaning to the practice. After all, if it's not important, would you feel motivated to get better? Anyway, this is getting into chicken/egg territory, and feels like it's in danger of disappearing up it's own cloaca, so...

a line should be drawn somewhere when the entertainment of one user disrupts the entertainment of others. But that's a hard point to argue when the game allows pirating as legitimate professions.

Piracy is in the game. High seas and all that. Hive minds are not. Not unless you're talking about Thargoids, that is. Are you going to start claiming that you're all RP'ing as Thargoid traders?

Yes, cheating is cheating regardless of difficulty and enforcement. And I would definitely consider botting as cheating. But playing ED as a Space Road Trucker simulator while using statistics data from an aggregate source isn't botting.

Well, you are talking about tools that automate data collection, providing the equivalent of many man hours worth of gameplay experience to a single player in fractions of a second, so that the player can increase their (trading) capabilities artificially and improve their hit/miss ratio. It's not that much different from an aimbot, when you really stop to consider. It's certainly more similar than not using trade tools, anyway.

It may not be the puritan's way to play Elite, but it's not cheating.

I've not seen any compelling arguments in the last couple of posts. This is very Pythonesque.

Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.

(short pause)

A: No it isn't.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

How is that remotely analogous to the use of crowdsourced cheat sheets?

You're implying that strategy is cheating. Hacking the game client or server to adjust commodity prices would be cheating. Exploiting a bug would be cheating. Working collectively is not cheating. If it were, what's the point of making it a multiplayer game?

Or the game itself brings the meaning to the practice. After all, if it's not important, would you feel motivated to get better? Anyway, this is getting into chicken/egg territory, and feels like it's in danger of disappearing up it's own cloaca, so...

Did you just pull out Newton’s flaming laser sword when you're the one that brought up the point that the "purpose" of the game is somehow objectively definable and we all must fit inside that purpose or it's cheating?

Piracy is in the game. High seas and all that. Hive minds are not. Not unless you're talking about Thargoids, that is. Are you going to start claiming that you're all RP'ing as Thargoid traders?

Are you implying there is something wrong with that?

Well, you are talking about tools that automate data collection, providing the equivalent of many man hours worth of gameplay experience to a single player in fractions of a second, so that the player can increase their (trading) capabilities artificially and improve their hit/miss ratio. It's not that much different from an aimbot, when you really stop to consider. It's certainly more similar than not using trade tools, anyway.

No one is talking about a program that plays the game for you. We're talking about sharing data. Not using macros. Not using bots. You're being completely nonsensical. It's a multiplayer game.

I've not seen any compelling arguments in the last couple of posts. This is very Pythonesque.

Perhaps there is much for you to learn from our Monty friends. The confidence you have in your stance leaves little room to persuade you of anything else.

 

[neXib]

Well, you are talking about tools that automate data collection, providing the equivalent of many man hours worth of gameplay experience to a single player in fractions of a second, so that the player can increase their (trading) capabilities artificially and improve their hit/miss ratio. It's not that much different from an aimbot, when you really stop to consider. It's certainly more similar than not using trade tools, anyway.

If I was a real person in the Elite Dangerous universe, that is exactly what I'd do. And I'd form a union, and we'd pay to hire protectors for our most valuable routes. Stations would subsidise us to stop by them even if they didn't have the most high demand stuff etc. etc.

If you want to call something unfair, you have to consider what's possible in-game or not. It's not cheating to think, invent and take advantage of the system, if that was cheating there wouldn't be a bank man outside of prison.

 

[Armour]

You're implying that strategy is cheating.

Nobody is implying that strategy is cheating. If you come up with a strategy under your own steam, with data that your pilot has had access to, and it allows you to make a consistent killing on the market, fair play.

Hacking the game client or server to adjust commodity prices would be cheating. Exploiting a bug would be cheating. Working collectively is not cheating. If it were, what's the point of making it a multiplayer game?

Try employing that argument at a casino poker table.

Did you just pull out Newton’s flaming laser sword when you're the one that brought up the point that the "purpose" of the game is somehow objectively definable and we all must fit inside that purpose or it's cheating?

Well, the purpose of the game is pretty clear to me. Of course, griefers/cheats/etc would have different objectives in mind.

Are you implying there is something wrong with that?

Stop that, it's silly.

No one is talking about a program that plays the game for you. We're talking about sharing data. Not using macros. Not using bots. You're being completely nonsensical. It's a multiplayer game.

Just because a trade cheat has to click the buttons and move from point A to point B, doesn't mean they're really playing the trading part of the game. Anyway, we've already seen people ask for autopilot, so maybe that won't even be required in future once the easy mode lobbyists get their way some more.

Perhaps there is much for you to learn from our Monty friends. The confidence you have in your stance leaves little room to persuade you of anything else.

You haven't made any arguments that makes sense thus far. The best one is basically summarised as "nobody can stop it, so deal with it". I am dealing with it just fine. Cheats exist IRL trading, and they are difficult to stop. I can deal with that as well. Nobody would seriously argue that the difficulty of catching them means that we should not consider them as cheats, or call them out when the opportunity arises.

 

[Armour]

If I was a real person in the Elite Dangerous universe, that is exactly what I'd do. And I'd form a union, and we'd pay to hire protectors for our most valuable routes. Stations would subsidise us to stop by them even if they didn't have the most high demand stuff etc. etc.

If there was an in-game market feed, one that gathered it's information either direct from markets via some FTL data transmission method that only station-sized equipment can utilise, or by collecting and disseminating uploads from passing traffic, I would be all for it's use, as it's obviously supposed to be there. As it's not there, I will assume it's not supposed to be.
If FTL data transmission is meant to be open to all, why must we go to a station with bounty tickets? Why must we seek out fugitives in physical space? Why must we return to inhabited space with our exploration data? See, it makes no sense. Saying "it's multiplayer", "if I don't someone else will", "stuff happens so deal with it", or "you can't stop me" are not arguments in favour of cheating, they're just rationalisations (and rather weak ones at that). And saying "it's not cheating" sends us back to Monty Python's Argument Sketch.

If you want to call something unfair, you have to consider what's possible in-game or not. It's not cheating to think, invent and take advantage of the system, if that was cheating there wouldn't be a bank man outside of prison.

I get that it might be embarrassing to think of oneself as a cheat, but that is as shoddy a pro-metagaming argument as I've read thus far.
Anyway, what is the great invention here - databases? The Internet? OCR? Sharing? A bunch of children standing on each other's shoulders hiding under a big coat doesn't make them into an adult, and they shouldn't be allowed to buy a drink.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

Nobody is implying that strategy is cheating. If you come up with a strategy under your own steam, with data that your pilot has had access to, and it allows you to make a consistent killing on the market, fair play.

You're literally saying that playing a multiple player game with other people is cheating.

Try employing that argument at a casino poker table.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Card_counting#Legal_status

Well, the purpose of the game is pretty clear to me. Of course, griefers/cheats/etc would have different objectives in mind.

Again, the confidence you have in your stance leaves little room for persuasion. The purpose you have derived from the game is not an objective one. The only way to actually know if there is one and what it is would be to ask the developers directly.

Stop that, it's silly.

It wasn't my argument; it was yours.

Just because a trade cheat has to click the buttons and move from point A to point B, doesn't mean they're really playing the trading part of the game. Anyway, we've already seen people ask for autopilot, so maybe that won't even be required in future once the easy mode lobbyists get their way some more.

Your rhetoric implies you are a purist (and that's your prerogative), but you can't expect everyone to yield to your ideology.

You haven't made any arguments that makes sense thus far. The best one is basically summarised as "nobody can stop it, so deal with it". I am dealing with it just fine. Cheats exist IRL trading, and they are difficult to stop. I can deal with that as well. Nobody would seriously argue that the difficulty of catching them means that we should not consider them as cheats, or call them out when the opportunity arises.

The only argument that I have made is that the Executive Producer, Michael Brookes, has made posts on the forum that seem contradictory to the EULA. One of them is right and the other is wrong. My point in the OP was to get clarity. That's all. I am not making presumptions and expressing them as objective.

As far as arguments go, yours is at best rooted in hyperbole.

 

[Shismar]

That may be the case in the internet connected world of today. But what about the one in the age of sail, when merchant ships travelled the globe and the fastest way to transmit most information was to physically write it down and take it to a location? Given the FTL comms restrictions in the Elite universe, surely that model is the one the game should represent, rather than your one of a space trader with a magic Bloomberg terminal?

Well, you shot yourself in the foot twice with this argument.

First off, there is already communication in game, GalNet, that works immediately and distributes information through all the galaxy. Not to mention the miraculous way that authorities at the other end of the galaxy know your crimes right away. So, no sail ships in space, sorry.

Secondly, trade information has at all times been a commodity by itself that was shared between members of the same organization and guarded ferociously against every one else. This changed with the invention and proliferation of the telegraph when commodity prices became public and were published by newspapers. So community based data sharing is very much in tradition with trading history.

But I expect you won't understand that. Your mind is made up and anyone who does not play the game your way is a cheater. I myself use those tools and they add to my enjoyment of the game. You don't? Suit yourself but don't cry that noone understands you. It is you who does not get it.

 

[Armour]

Well, you shot yourself in the foot twice with this argument.

Let's see if that's true...

there is already communication in game, GalNet, that works immediately and distributes information through all the galaxy. Not to mention the miraculous way that authorities at the other end of the galaxy know your crimes right away.

FTL transmissions seem to be limited in scope. There may be many reasons for that. Perhaps they are limited to station-station (or larger bodies) due to power requirements and/or equipment size necessary to achieve it. Or data could be physically couriered within the locked portion of each ship's data banks - the same bit that logs and stores your crimes, i.e. the bit that is interrogated by a KWS module, hence the

miraculous way that authorities at the other end of the galaxy know your crimes right away

There must be a fair few NPC ships ferrying between systems, these could easily act like packet boats (another "age of sail" parallel). As I stated in a previous post, why does exploration work the way it does otherwise? Or bounty tickets? The reality of both those aspects of the game would simply fall apart otherwise.

Claiming that Galnet invalidates what I stated by dint of it's mere existence is simply untrue.

So, no sail ships in space, sorry.

David Braben made the comparisons between the Elite universe of 3300 and the age of sail on Earth c. 1700-1800 in interviews well before the release of this game, and during the development process. It's not like this was something I just pulled out of my own imagination. Sorry.

trade information has at all times been a commodity by itself that was shared between members of the same organization and guarded ferociously against every one else.

This changed with the invention and proliferation of the telegraph when commodity prices became public and were published by newspapers. So community based data sharing is very much in tradition with trading history.

On a single planet, the speed of light is fast enough to be called instant. Back when that technology didn't exist, as you pointed out, that information was closely guarded. Given that FTL data comms is not a universally available technology in this setting, for the reasons I gave previously, it seems more likely that humanity's attitude to data sharing would revert back to the days before the telegraph.

(If trade data is meant to be freely available to all, why does it cost credits to buy it?)

But I expect you won't understand that. Your mind is made up and anyone who does not play the game your way is a cheater. I myself use those tools and they add to my enjoyment of the game. You don't? Suit yourself but don't cry that noone understands you. It is you who does not get it.

I get it. The truth does hurt sometimes. I know that some folks understand me, or they wouldn't even post their rationalisations (I won't say "set out an opposing position to mine" as there have been no arguments worthy of the term made thus far).