Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't think there will be actual widgets. The ability to do them will have to be determined based on the cost by the time we get to that point, but if you figure the cost of the widget, plus shipping, we might have to charge you $10 or something close to that, and it seems a bit ridiculous to have to make you pay to access your account.
Using the Google Authenticator is the easiest option and that will probably be our base case until we have the time & breathing room to look into getting a custom app built. Google Authenticator has the advantage that it runs on just about every flavor of Android (and iOS), but the disadvantage that it's fugly, and if you have a bunch of 2-factor accounts it is a pain to ensure you're typing the right code in.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We are so on topic now...
...is this a good time to mention how cool real Darkness would be in-game? *grin*
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I know that this rule:
"Don't compare anyone to any person or group of historical infamy."
was only meant to apply to a couple of popular political groups from the 1930s.
Er, no. I can think of modern groups (Crips) that are infamous in ways we don't need brought into the game.
carefully avoid words like 'vandalism' and 'assassinate' (even though everyone else can continue using them). And woe betide the angry player who calls your rules 'draconian' upon receiving his first warning... that might count as his second offense in and of itself. Yes, this is an *actual* concern.
It's an absurd concern.
My response to all your example questions is the same:
I'd ignore them unless they somehow managed to get enough notice to be worth paying attention to.
If they somehow got that much notice, I'd ask them to make changes as we deemed necessary to neuter the issue. If they refused they'd be asked to leave.
The stipulation in the prohibition against yelling "Fire!" In a theater is that there be someone else there who would panic. It is ridiculously hard to make enough noise by being immersion breaking or impolite to rise to the level of concern in an MMO, especially one focused on rewarding players who work together as opposed to being agents of agitation.
The easiest way to win the game you propose is not to play, which is exactly what we'll do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There still seems to be a concern that the description of the guidelines actually ARE the guidelines. To me, (as I read both the lines, and whats between them) it seems the easier path to assume that this environment won't live in a vacuum, and within any given populace, the types of serious transgressions described would either A) work themselves out organically via the player base via exclusion, or B) elevate the concerns to the Mods where they follow their internal guidelines to decide on a proper course of action. When GW tells us they won't be explicit about those processes, that doesn't mean we can interpret the process via a short list describing it.
Allow me an analogy; A Car is a shapely box on wheels, that moves at greater than walking speed. By not describing the inner workings of an alternator, fuel pump, driveshaft, and wheel bearings, are you less capable of learning what A Car does? Goblinworks has said their policy is "Don't be a bad person, and think you can get away with it." Do you really need to have that parsed out in 50 ways to know that if you act like a racist misogynist dooshwaffle that you're gonna have to deal with consequences.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only real concern with this system is when it comes to PM conversations. For me this shouldn't be a huge deal because I operate my own Teamspeak where 90%+ of my non-public communications will probably be taking place, but if I still used in-game chat as my primary form of communication I could see this being a huge concern.
Basically I've always operated in-game with the same standards I do in real life. Keep anything said in public appropriate for the public. Keep everything said in private or in a small group appropriate to that person or group.
Basically, if you have been talking with someone awhile, or their opening message to you is "***** you, you ******ing son of a ****** I will ****** your ****** and ****** with your (insert female relative here.)" or just "How the ***** is it going dude?" and the other person replies with a message about as appropriate how will that be dealt with? Will GM's be searching PM's for that kind of stuff or will it only be brought to the attention if reported. If reported are they going to read back a bit in the discussion and take a different action if there is back and forth going on than if one side is saying. "Don't talk to me like that, I don't want to hear that kind of stuff."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is no possible way we could ever afford the time to sift through PMs. We're not even going to be able to sift through general chat.
Someone has to be offended enough by what you say to flag the conversation. Then we'll look at it.
You might get dismissed as not worth the time to bother, or get a friendly "don't do that", or get a real warning (which would be logged), a suspension or a ban. The severity of the response will be related to our subjective opinion on the severity of the problem and our history in dealing with you and your past behavior.
And enforcement of these rules will be arbitrary, and capricious. They'll vary from rep to rep, and with the load we're coping with, and a million other unquantifiable factors. You will have avenues to appeal these decisions, and those appeals will also be arbitrary and capricious.
And just so we're clear, this is exactly what every other MMO does. Some of them pretend there's some kind of formal justice system, but having seen it up close and on the inside i can tell you that's just PR.
If you're really worried about it, don't send PMs or post in open chat. Then you'll never see any effect.
But frankly, I wouldn't worry.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There still seems to be a concern that the description of the guidelines actually ARE the guidelines. To me, (as I read both the lines, and whats between them) it seems the easier path to assume that this environment won't live in a vacuum, and within any given populace, the types of serious transgressions described would either A) work themselves out organically via the player base via exclusion, or B) elevate the concerns to the Mods where they follow their internal guidelines to decide on a proper course of action. When GW tells us they won't be explicit about those processes, that doesn't mean we can interpret the process via a short list describing it.
A 1964 US Supreme Court case raised the potential for the Court to create a strict definition of hardcore pornography. Justice Potter Stewart stated "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..."
That's what's really going on here: no list of rules Goblinworks could make would successfully differentiate the exact set of "everything that's a problem" from the exact set of "everything that's not a problem." Instead, you get a list of examples, and a note that things will be examined on a case-by-case basis. Yes, this requires that anyone who wishes to play the game have some level of trust in the Goblinworks admins, and no, there really isn't a better solution.
Ultimately, you have two choices: Trust that Goblinworks will do a job that you'll find satisfactory, or don't. In the latter case, I recommend you don't play the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
interesting convo, but back on topic: Will these authenticators be accessible without some sort of smartphone?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
interesting convo, but back on topic: Will these authenticators be accessible without some sort of smartphone?
I must echo this sentiment. I don't have a mobile phone or 'smart phone', and quite frankly, I don't want one because it's yet another drain on my power, my funds and my sanity.
Would it be possible to have the small authenticators like you can purchase from some banks, or perhaps more familiar to my fellow posters, the 'Digipass Go 6' authenticators that World of Warcraft uses?
Small, compact and doesn't require your players to buy a Smartphone just to play the game.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! I cringe to play a game without an authenticator, but if it's a choice between a hundred dollars for a smart-phone that I'll only really use to log on to Pathfinder Online, or fifty dollars (including shipping and freight) for an Authenticator, I know which one I'll be gunning for.
|
I see. In that case it should be something accessable from whatever computer is being used to play the game.
Though they could just do the IP rememberence thing that banks do all the time. Logging in from a new IP requires the full gamut of security questions, or maybe even another email authentication.
Though if they do that they should allow you to remember a couple IPs, in case yoou have a seperate computer at your summer house or something.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
Too early to be definitive, but my guess is we'll use Google Authenticator, so it will be useable anywhere you can use Google authenticator.
Smartphones seem the most likely place for that to happen, and the venn diagram of people who play MMOs and people who have smartphones overlaps at the 99% percentile, so I don't see that being a handicap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is Google Authenticator usable by a home PC?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Too early to be definitive, but my guess is we'll use Google Authenticator, so it will be useable anywhere you can use Google authenticator.
Smartphones seem the most likely place for that to happen, and the venn diagram of people who play MMOs and people who have smartphones overlaps at the 99% percentile, so I don't see that being a handicap.
Finally: I'm one of the 1%. And it is a game.
</em head on desk, sobbing>
It's a program that verifies that you are who you say you are (to the game server) through your smartphone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I used to really like the extra security provided by an authenticator. But then my mobile RIFT authenticator broke (it kept giving me invalid keys) and support didn't want to help, so I ended up being forced to cancel my account.
So. Yeah. I'd prefer an authenticator system that doesn't do that, or have some kind of recovery option for if/when it breaks. Or if the phone croaks. Because that sucked. And it would suck infinitely more in PFO.
|
|
Do I need to use it every time?
And thankfully someone above said it could be used from a computer as well, or I really would have a problem (I think it's crazy enough as is, though I have an inkling of an idea about the concern, but needing a special kind of phone to play a game on a computer when both the game and the computer are entirely unrelated to any phone is so far beyond ridiculous, that I am amazed we even need to mention and clarify the matter.)
And yes, I will not have another smartphone with phone service for a few years and probably not then either. My current phone I use for internet has no service because $200+ a month is unreasonable at current economic standpoint, which probably won't change even when I have enough to buy games again (which I am hoping happens before PFO comes out), thankfully I can use my grandparents wifi.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@DLH - many players use same un/pw across their online a/c's - there's not a lot anyone can do to solve that if players are "ridiculous" enough to not take their online basic security seriously. So authenticator is good idea. The idea that it is useable (additionally) from smart devices (via an app) just reflects the growth in ubiquity of these (as with wallet, keys etc, usually on/near person).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@DLH - many players use same un/pw across their online a/c's - there's not a lot anyone can do to solve that if players are "ridiculous" enough to not take their online basic security seriously. So authenticator is good idea. The idea that it is useable (additionally) from smart devices (via an app) just reflects the growth in ubiquity of these (as with wallet, keys etc, usually on/near person).
Speaking of user names, I really hate the current trend of using your email address as your user name. And THEN they tell us not to share it with anyone. Uhm, sorry, but I don't think you understand the purpose of an email address. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That, and eg limited number of chars with only characters and numbers input... the list goes on for terrible account creation security. Increasing the number of pieces of information required is a very simple and powerful improvement.
I recall how baffled I was when I realized that a certain large online account system (there's this net. Where you do battle) didn't even use case-sensitive passwords. I mean, sure, brute forcing passwords isn't terrible common in this day and age, but come on!