michaelk

Personally, I don't see the point in schematics if NQ is planning on implementing power.
 
Power seems like a much more intuitive and realistic way to gate industry -- and one that would be easier for new players to understand and afford. As a design concept, schematics don't feel like they really fit -- it's a clumsy solution to the core problem. 
 
The point of alpha/beta isn't to have a balanced game. That would be an absurd goal that requires an extremely detailed plan -- game design discipline that most studios couldn't achieve, never mind NQ.
 
I don't think 0.23 was "horrible" -- but I do think it was a major waste of time that could have been better spent on feature development.
 
Schematics were a balance change, and balance changes don't really add anything to the game, they shuffle around the parts that already exist.
 
Why spend time balancing a game that isn't done? You'll need to revisit as more features roll out, regardless...I get that they promised "no wipes" -- that doesn't somehow make it more plausible to balance an alpha/beta as you go. 
 
NQ is really slow at dev -- it might be a different story if they were faster, but they aren't. They should have invested the time it took to develop 0.23 into finishing features rather than trying to balance the very incomplete features they already have.
 
That's why I actually agree with them ignoring the schematic price exploit -- they're slow enough as it is without distractions, their only goal should be finishing the game's core features so that the discussion of balance actually makes sense. 

Personally, I don't see the point in schematics if NQ is planning on implementing power.
 
Power seems like a much more intuitive and realistic way to gate industry -- and one that would be easier for new players to understand and afford. As a design concept, schematics don't feel like they really fit -- it's a clumsy solution to the core problem. 
 
The point of alpha/beta isn't to have a balanced game. That would be an absurd goal that requires an extremely detailed plan -- game design discipline that most studios couldn't achieve, never mind NQ.
 
I don't think 0.23 was "horrible" -- but I do think it was a major waste of time that could have been better spent on feature development.
 
Schematics were a balance change, and balance changes don't really add anything to the game, they shuffle around the parts that already exist.
 
Why spend time balancing a game that isn't done? You'll need to revisit as more features roll out, regardless...I get that they promised "no wipes" -- that doesn't somehow make it more plausible to balance an alpha/beta as you go. 
 
NQ is really slow at dev -- it might be a different story if they were faster, but they aren't. They should have invested the time it took to develop 0.23 into finishing features rather than trying to balance the very incomplete features they already have.
 
That's why I actually agree with them ignoring the schematic price exploit -- they're slow enough as it is without distractions, their only goal should be finishing the game's core features so that the discussion of balance actually makes sense. 

As if having some extra threads is such a freakin' inconvenience. Not like there's a mess of activity around here anyway. 
In other words, he should quit and work for Newsmax? ?

Funniest line on this forum for decades and you know it..........  I am all about the laughs.

And yes, you have tried to improve, so how about we all do that, how about we all just focus on the positives and the potential for at least one more patch!  I am really enjoying the game again, I see some light at the end of the tunnel and I hope GOD DAMN IT, it is not a train.......

Oh and as for people talking about the games they paid for, the majority of the people posting here have had their pound of flesh and some.

Purpose,  Makes lights randomly change rgb colour and cycles them to give a breathing effect.
 
Level:
Lua  beginner = cut and paste code, create filters unit start and system update in lua editor , DU = know how to link lights to a programming board
Build
You need 1 Programming Board(PB) and some lights. Connect the lights to the PB and name each slot in the lua editor (Ctrl L) you have connected l1 , l2 etc. If you don't want 8 then edit the source code and remove. 
code is below.
 
Other stuff you can do : add a detector to autostart ,  change parameters in unit start to get the feel you like.
 
-- copy and paste into unit start
 
unit.hide() -- hides programming board
-- remove these where you have not connected a light
l1.activate()
l2.activate()
l3.activate()
l4.activate()
l5.activate()
l6.activate()
l7.activate()
l8.activate()
bClock          = system.getTime() -- start clock
origRgb         = l1.getRGBColor() -- stores the colour of the original light if you want to reset lights on exit
breathRate      = 1 --export: rate of breathing Multiplier
changeFrame     = 1200 --export: frame colour and channel cycle
rgbIndex        = utils.round(math.random(3)) -- choose channel to breathe
r               = math.random(255) -- setup channels
g               = math.random(255)
b               = math.random(255)
frameCount      = 0
 
-- Copy and Paste into System update
frameCount = frameCount + 1
 
if ( frameCount % changeFrame == 0 ) then --randomize rgb and channel
    r = math.random(255)
    g = math.random(255)
    b = math.random(255)
    rgbIndex = utils.round(math.random(3)) -- choose channel to breathe
end
nClock = system.getTime()
local timeSeconds = ( nClock - bClock)
local breath = utils.round(( math.exp( math.sin(timeSeconds * breathRate )) - 0.36787944 )* 108.0)
 
if rgbIndex == 1 then
    r = breath
    elseif rgbIndex == 2 then
    g = breath
    else
    b = breath
end 
-- set rgb colour of linked lights ,remove these where you have not connected a light
    l1.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l2.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l3.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l4.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l5.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l6.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l7.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
    l8.setRGBColor(r,g,b) 
 

I don't understand why people think that data governance is paranoia.
 
Don't be naive! 
 
"Oh that's not important, no one can use that for harm!". Yes, they can...and the law doesn't let you decide that case-by-case. 
 
It's baffling because part of NQ's job is game design -- understanding how people exploit systems for personal gain is kind of their wheelhouse? 
 
You think the situation I've outlined is obscure and unlikely? Great, so do I...that still means it is a viable attack vector.
 
There's a long list of companies that have learned the hard way that even obscure vectors eventually get exploited...how many cases have there been where corporations have been warned about an insecurity well before it was exploited, but didn't bother to do anything...? They probably thought it was paranoid, too -- that the risk was so low it didn't matter.
 
A lawsuit or exploit from a game API like this will materialize at some point. It might not be with DU, but it will happen.

The term ‘personal data’ is the entryway to the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Only if a processing of data concerns personal data, the General Data Protection Regulation applies. The term is defined in Art. 4 (1). Personal data are any information which are related to an identified or identifiable natural person.
The data subjects are identifiable if they can be directly or indirectly identified, especially by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or one of several special characteristics, which expresses the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, commercial, cultural or social identity of these natural persons. In practice, these also include all data which are or can be assigned to a person in any kind of way. For example, the telephone, credit card or personnel number of a person, account data, number plate, appearance, customer number or address are all personal data.
 
So if a name is in a certain place at a certain time from a French company that makes it possible, where EU citizens have access to, then it is already established by law that this is a natural person we are talking about. 
 
Furthermore: 
- How long will the data be kept? A look at Article 11.
 
Article 15 is interesting too :
 
 
The whole articles can be read here: https://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/article-15-right-of-access-by-the-data-subject-GDPR.htm
 
Just because a few people don't care doesn't mean it doesn't matter. This is not about tin foil hats but about your rights as an EU citizen. If someone thinks they have to violate them and doesn't secure the legal cover, then we have a problem. I have nowhere given my consent for you to use this with my data.
 
Edit: 
TLDR: A French company allows a player to collect data on other EU citizens (players) without them knowing what is happening to them or being able to object and the EU players never had an opportunity to press somewhere "I Agree".

I took this to mean that negotiating the reward outside of the one set in the mission system is non-binding. For example, if the mission offers 1000 quanta for a delivery, but the description says they'll give you 10 engines as additional payment when you arrive, then the only payment guaranteed by the system is 1000 quanta. Whether you will get the engines or not is non-binding. The part about escrow specifically mentions both rewards and collatoral, so I think this part is just a warning to only trust what is guaranteed by the mission and nothing negotiated outside of that.
 
This is a good point. I like the idea of having a review system, but all IRL review systems need some sort of appeal mechanism to prevent this. It was mentioned in another post that you will be able to view an employers mission history to see if they have a lot of suspicious missions that seem like review farming. For example, 50 missions to deliver items for 1km with 5* reviews or something like that. The only guarantee is that people will try to abuse the system for fun or to get an advantage. Hopefully we have the tools to identify the abuse.

Where would you like me to put it? Is General a better place in terms of visibility? More than happy to shuffle it.  

It is important. I'll move it so that it's more visible! It's okay to feel grumpy. As always, I'm here to try to help however I can, even if that ends up being limited sometimes.

As if having some extra threads is such a freakin' inconvenience. Not like there's a mess of activity around here anyway. 
In other words, he should quit and work for Newsmax? ?

Yes, another newspaper. Feeling creative while materials smelt. 

Did your source want you to share this info publicly, when they shared it with you? 
 
Do you believe that this is info that the community needs to know, and that NQ has made the wrong decision in not making it public themselves?
 
Does your source plan on giving you more info in the future, like the specific date of the wipe, or details on what exactly will be wiped?  if so, do you plan on sharing that, or keeping the info to yourself?
 
It's ok, I don't actually believe you.  But i am interested in knowing whether you think it's ok for an NQ employee to share "insider info" like this?
 
Assuming you made the whole thing up, you're still basically accusing a (fictional) NQ employee, of doing something that could get them fired.
 
Just wonder what the goal is. 
 
 
 
 

Besides the fact NQ has _never_ excluded a wipe nor have they said "We will not wipe .. period", it should be obvious that if NQ does a wipe, with blueprints and Talent points retained, it would need to be at at time when the game is in a more stable and complete state. While personally I think the game really needs to have the option to wipe more frequently, it is a fair compromise to choose a single point during this time and prior to release to do a single wipe once the game is in a state it will benefit from a reset as it removes any pain from previous exploits, mistakes and loopholes NQ was not able to repair or choose to not repair at the time they occurred.
 
And as I mentioned in an earlier response, the moment NQ introduces Energy management is the opportune moment to do a wipe. I still feel the way they choose to introduce Energy is a cheap cop out option which really adds little to the game overall. It is the characteristic choice for NQ to make, just throw an arbitrary number into the mix instead of actually develop an immersive mechanic designed to promote and drive emergent gameplay such as I suggest HERE.

For someone with a PHD in AI and robotics, JC (NQ) is mysteriously resistant to the concept of AI in DU.
 
There are many great applications for NPCs that would enhance the emergent possibilities and round out the lack of options with PVP....instead, the only AI we get is ore bots. 
 
"Everything must be run by players" isn't a real design, it's an arbitrary aspiration that wasn't really thought-out.
 
Even the most fundamental aspects of this aspiration were left on the drawing board (like how to inject fresh currency supply into a game with no NPCs). 
 
It also makes the game thematically dead. We all survived the death of earth....now we land on a planet with a bunch of identical cities linked together that have zero residents, but a home-depo-esque showcase of various materials and doors...? I know many people don't care at all about theme or lore -- but it does add dimension and immersion which DU lacks. 

So I take it NQ considers that bug resolved then as there is a workaround /s

I think they belong in new threads...probably should be pinned by the mods too ?
 
Unclean exotic dancers with a propensity for ganja use...? 
 
Finally the news is speaking to me as a human being, talking about the real issues without a didactic narrative pushing their owner's ideals. 
 
Seriously though what is your doctorate in...? "Botany?" 

I'll put all the new issues in this thread. Enjoy! Here's today's news! 

Ah, wipes. Everyone's favorite conspiracy. 
 
Still no compelling reason for NQ to wipe -- there's been exactly 0 major updates so far. It doesn't make a lot of sense to do a wipe in conjunction with the first major update, at least IMHO. 
 
If the game's balance is broken, they need room to keep breaking it until closer to release.
 
There's not much point doing a wipe, dropping a big update, then realizing that this update introduced a new crop of exploits that once again unbalances the game. They'd be creating a lot more problems than they would be solving.
 
The balance of the game really isn't their top priority at this point. That should be kind of obvious based on their collective shrugs toward exploits until now.
 
They have a mountain of bugs to fix and features to implement. If they can't prove that DU is capable of moving beyond Alpha, it really doesn't matter how balanced or fair the game is. 
 
Wipe or not, the game's future does hinge on the next big update. It'll soon be six months since "beta" launch. NQ needs to show they can actually get the game to a releasable state before they prove that the game is balanced and fair...they can always wipe later, but they have very limited time to prove that the game can actually be finished.

Not easily -- but they have avenues through international treaty, especially between US/EU. GDPR supersedes any clause hidden in the terms of use when it comes to EU citizens. 
 
Honestly, NQ would probably be the party that receives the fine -- they're the ones that own the data and it is their obligation to make sure their users abide by GDPR. I don't think there's ever been a case where the EU fines an individual for GDPR violations...random gamers probably don't have anything to worry about....but NQ? They maybe should. 
 
Chances are good they could ignore it and there'd never be a problem...but if there was a breach (see my phishing description above) they'd be in trouble.

I can understand that it is calculated in proportion to the players who pay but I think those statistics start from a wrong point. Are there more people from other languages than Spanish paying? Yes, of course, I have been a gamer for 30 years and I have practically played any paid game, free and pay to win and it is assumed that it is because the community is less willing but the reality is that the percentage of games "of payment "ewn Spanish is minimal so obviously they are not going to pay fees to games that have not taken the trouble to make it easy. However, there are many micro-payment games, or pay to win where authentic fortunes are left in the Hispanic community. I put the example of albion where many players (almost everyone I know) pay not only the monthly payment if they do not also put money in gold , approximately 20 or 30 euros per month.
Having said this, I add that there are many ways that do not involve a great economic expense for the company to translate the game, the community itself is in charge of enabling the appropriate tools, for example elder scroll online has patches and addons made by the community and authorized by the game that They translate it, albion online has a translation made by the community and they have enabled automated systems to "report" mistranslated phrases or words, so that the game automatically corrects it. I think that the effort is small for the huge target of the public to which there is access, besides there is no ... and I would like to emphasize this, there are no large multiplayer games of this theme in Spanish and that is an advantage
 

Without reading the whole thread, how did it rank on the tin-foil-hat-ometer? Bet there was all sorts of theories going down.

Interesting stuff on GDPR @michaelk pretty much all of it is correct, if a bit tenuous.  I also agree with your comment about marketeers, if we find a loophole we use it, a bit like gamers tbh

And it is also very easy to get around the identifiers law using ToS, companies like HubSpot, Sharpspring (pretty much any SaaS digital marketing provider) etc do it all the time, whenever anyone agree their cookie ToS.

Thinking about this some more I think people in here are misunderstanding what 'personally identifiable information' actually means (at least in the European context of the relevant real-world laws).  A character name is clearly personally identifiable information in this context because there is only one real-world individual who is using that player name.  It doesn't matter that you can't actually get to the real-world information for the person, all that matters is that only one person in the real world uses that in-game name, so the in-game name identifies one real-world individual.  It is personally identifiable information.
 
I think people have to be careful what information they store along with in-game names in this context.  I don't really know what the rules would be for in-game information being stored together with this (a list of orgs I have been in, for example).  IMO abusing in-game information about someone is pretty similar to killing someone in-game, it's all part of the game.  But if they store any information which can be used to derive real-world information about the individual uniquely identified by the character name then that's clearly going to be covered by a lot of real-world laws. 

One obvious example would be saving my character name together with the date and time at which I passed by a particular point.  Now you have a list of dates and times when I, the uniquely identifiable indivudual in the real world, was sat at my computer playing a video game.  That's tracking real world activity of humans whether you like it or not.  And it might not stay in-game.  Say, for example, I'm playing games when I'm meant to be working and my boss catches me.   They might get my character name from my work computer then go pay whoever is collecting information in-game real-world money for a list of the times I was known to be playing.  At that point it's not really in-game information at all.  In Europe, at least, they would have to get my permission before keeping a list of information which has the potential to be used in this way, telling me why they have it and offering me the option to have it deleted at any time.

But it all depends where the person who is collecting the information lives, what they store and where they store it.

Damn... this thread is a rollercoaster, and I thought Wombats being the only animals to poop cubic turds would be the most interesting thing I read today. 
 
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/01/how-do-wombats-poop-cubes-scientists-get-bottom-mystery
 
 
though I guess DU just need to explain exactly what information is “uniquely” identifiable in game and available to export via the API in the EULA and making it an opt in, check box based, condition for playing the game. 

At best it can record the character's name which is not he same. The account is identified in game by a number, there is no reference nor a way to obtain the account name (which for DU is the email address used) beyond that. So yes, one can identify a player in game by the ID even when they change their character name but that is about as far as it goes.
 
If you have anything to show me this is not correct I'd be happy to accept that but afaik this is the situation in game.