Exactly. To all those people saying “whaa whaa but you can use it to set up macros”, you can do that with any other single button on your keyboard, mouse, joystick, or any other peripheral. VA is just as “illegal” as any other peripheral.
What's Frontier's Position on Voice Attack?
- Thread starter Half-Lock
- Start date
Exactly. To all those people saying “whaa whaa but you can use it to set up macros”, you can do that with any other single button on your keyboard, mouse, joystick, or any other peripheral. VA is just as “illegal” as any other peripheral.
This made me remember a issue with Trackmania. Some company released a keyboard that could be programmed, some youtuber used the keyboard programmed in a way that gave him a minuscule advantage (game has some built in precision modes, but the keyboard made it easier/more granular) but the Trackmania game still supported the effect given by the keyboard, people cried out (only later learning about the keyboard), Trackmania devs came forward saying "we won't allow further usage, but we recognized it wasn't used in bad faith, so we're only removing the records with it" (I think the youtuber talked to them before asking for clarification, which prompted the devs response), then Trackmania devs implemented some new precision modes that implemented the advantage that the keyboard reproduced but for everyone.
Controller or not, as already stated, the ToS is clear in that FDev has drawn some lines in the sand, and they can move them as they see fit. Them partnering up with voice command creators and giving them tools legitimizes the voice command creators, but doesn't change the later: they can act on that. The game doesn't have a single input "request docking permission" or "target powerplant" button, and when any tool implements something that doesn't exist on the game, it's automating something (therefore, breaking ToS). The whole "several actions in one" is poor explaining, because several is more than one but how strongly you feel at the higher than one changes from person to person and from situation to situation.
Elite isn't competitive as Trackmania, so I don't expect FDev to clash hard on automation outside of BGS manipulation. Specially if it involves talking to your ship, which invokes nice fuzzy feelings of sci-fi and "my ship computer is my friend", things that are tangential to Elite's design. FDev won't shoot its foot saying "no flirting with your ship", so voice commands will either be ignored by them or regulated as people cry out (IF they do).
TL;DR: They break FDev's ToS. They are good for the game. FDev can break FDev's ToS. FDev will allow them, breaking their own ToS AND abiding by it at the same time, because they are good for the game. Specially because the alternative is spending more development resources and legal resources extending the ToS to cover third party tools limits and/or implementing in-game macros to limit how much automation players can do by simply saying "you can automate what the game allows you to".
To be clear, voice commands performing a single action do NOT break ToS the same way a key press performing a single action do not break ToS.
Voice commands performing multiple actions with a single command may break ToS (at FDEV’s discretion) the same way a key press performing multiple actions could.
Interestingly, despite Frontier's attempt to cover every possible method a player might use to cheat, they missed one here.
The relevant "3c) use cheats, automation software, hacks, mods, or any other unauthorized software designed to modify or defeat the purpose or experience of the Game;" (the only bit which specifically mentions automation) doesn't say anything about a pure hardware automation solution: if you hard-wire a keyboard so that pressing a particular key sends a sequence of key commands on a suitable time delay (and does that independent of what it's plugged into, any possible driver configuration, etc.), that's not covered there.
It would of course be covered by "use any [...] manual means to access the Game" which is the bit which bans Voice Attack (and keyboards, mice, joysticks, controllers, pedals, trackpads, play-by-post, and any other methods people might come up with)
Humm, you mean using a docking computer is against the terms of service because it performs multiple actions (pitch, roll, yaw, throttle and landing gear commands) with a single button press?
Voice commands from my experience are only useful for non time sensitive functions. Landing gear, request docking and such. If it absolutely, positively must be executed NOW, set a button.
Voice commands from my experience are only useful for non time sensitive functions. Landing gear, request docking and such. If it absolutely, positively must be executed NOW, set a button.
Indeed, a key bind for requesting docking permission or a bind key to engage SCA - Things that FDev are refusing to implement for various reasons.
This is one of my pet peeves.
Yet, with VA you can request docking permission (which involves going through a succession of commands) - automation? Yes
Forbidden? No, even tho automation is forbidden
So, FD, how about a bind key for requesting docking permission and one for engaging SCA without having to visit the Nav Panel and without me having to buy and setup VA/HCS ?
My gut tells me that reason is because the original design was for there to be more "comms " interactions than requesting docking with a station... in which case a hotkey for one arbitrary interaction of many would be pretty obscure (and also why requesting docking is such a nested option)
No, because it's not an external/ third party app; it's a function of the game.
The Nain Logs (pronounced "Nein")
A story, written in the first person perspective, about women coming to know themselves in the vastness of the galaxy
An organization unified in its aspirations bent on attaining a controlling stake in the future of the galaxy
Written by me, a non-contracted laborer working within Frontier Developments' intellectual property
A story, written in the first person perspective, about women coming to know themselves in the vastness of the galaxy
An organization unified in its aspirations bent on attaining a controlling stake in the future of the galaxy
Written by me, a non-contracted laborer working within Frontier Developments' intellectual property
Its all very interesting, in its own right, but its sort of like saying that football is called "The Beautiful Game" because the life of the football is so very similar to the scene from Fight Club where Edward Norton takes out his frustrations on Jared Leto
It's really weird how anyone can think VA or other macros might be against the ToS because "unfair advantage" (which they are not btw), while fdev seems to be perfectly fine with withdrawing certain GC modules like the phasing multis (a c2 multicannon with the dps of a regular c4 one) from the tech brokers for months. Some people who had more time to participate in that GC have 2 of those multicannons, other, less lucky people have only one or none at all.
Anyone can set up a VA or other kind of macro if they want to level the playing field but no one can buy a weapon that's simply not for sale ingame.
Anyone can set up a VA or other kind of macro if they want to level the playing field but no one can buy a weapon that's simply not for sale ingame.
Why’s that weird?
I’ve seen people whinge about AFK strategies for boosting combat rank and I figured I’d check to see if the use of multi-step macros to produce various advantages, in PvP, trading, etc, would be against the policy.
And the CG rewards are made available to incentivize participation in various narrative-branching activities, which might produce advantageous circumstances to certain players, but so too do the various playgroup rules about weapon-usage and playstyles produce advantageous circumstances- its hard to pew pew with nothing but gimballed beams and MCs against a ’Vette with full-therm shield boosters and PA’s and Rail guns
It was not AFK credit farming or botting, but VA/AHK/whatever macros specifically what I was comparing to the case of CG multis.
Macros won't give you an unfair advantage because they are available to everyone. The software of most peripherals like keyboards/keypads, joysticks, gaming mice support macros, but even if yours don't, you can still buy Voice Attack or just use its free trial version or some other freeware like AHK. So the playing field is completely level in this regard.
The CG multis, on the other hand, are NOT available equally to all players. Not everyone had the same opportunity to get hold of them. You either had time to participate in the CG to grind them out or you had not (and what about those players who had not even yet purchased the game at the time the CG was happening?). Which is the polar opposite of a level playing field. In other words, it's unfair.
That's why I said it was weird.
… how dare you…
Its a fair point, I suppose, but it still makes sense from the perspective of gauging participation and driving the narrative forward to provide these advantageous modules- which are opportunities afforded everyone
Trainers and other cheat software are also freely available... so anyone could download and use them to level the playing field... so that's a flawed position.
"Having a level playing field" is not the underlying consideration here. Is the same reason why afk farming could be considered problematic, even if it uses no external tools.
Last edited:
I didn't even know Elite Dangerous existed when I would have had to buy it to get a Cobra Mk IV.
VA is just a high-latency verbal keyboard. If FDev disallowed VA, they'd also have to do the same for just about every gaming peripheral.
Most companies allow anything that requires a physical action for each input. Macros are a gray area, but trainers are an obvious no. That's because trainers manipulate the game directly in memory. Macros interact with the game's normal input method, so they are generally allowed.
Most companies allow anything that requires a physical action for each input. Macros are a gray area, but trainers are an obvious no. That's because trainers manipulate the game directly in memory. Macros interact with the game's normal input method, so they are generally allowed.