SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
2. The second point I do not think should happen. It requires to things. First, furnishings would need to be grouped (not by the player but by Zenimax), and then, a player can decide which groups of furnishings visitors can interact with. That much is a requirement since it would reduce the server load required to make this work. The second point is that all this information needs to be stored and controlled on the server side, which would increase the server load. I do not see this as having a level of importance to make this happen, let alone that many would even be interested in such a level of control.
3. The third request does not clearly state what is being asked. We can already set access levels for guilds and individuals. That covers all levels of access and how we would reasonably want to grant them.
SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
SpiritKitten wrote: »SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
That addon author is a ZOS employee.
SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
2. The second point I do not think should happen. It requires to things. First, furnishings would need to be grouped (not by the player but by Zenimax), and then, a player can decide which groups of furnishings visitors can interact with. That much is a requirement since it would reduce the server load required to make this work. The second point is that all this information needs to be stored and controlled on the server side, which would increase the server load. I do not see this as having a level of importance to make this happen, let alone that many would even be interested in such a level of control.
3. The third request does not clearly state what is being asked. We can already set access levels for guilds and individuals. That covers all levels of access and how we would reasonably want to grant them.
For #2, I think it could work because furnishings actually are already grouped. Every furniture item is coded to have a tag with their category. You can see these categories in the menu when you craft furniture. For example, ‘conservatory’, ‘courtyard’, ‘dining’ and so on. We have gotten some new intractable furnishings lately that I think increase the need for this (such as the Apocrypha bridges that roll up).
For #3 I am basically saying that they should do away with the options of ‘decorator’ ‘visitor’ and ‘limited visitor’ and instead separate the functions. Yes we can already set individual access levels, which I really like, but if they were to add more permission settings it makes sense to divide these. It would be more clear for new players too because right now you have to view the ‘limited visitor’ tooltip to see what those limits are (I’m not saying it’s hard to view a tooltip lol but I can imagine a situation where it might be missed).
SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
Zenimax is the gatekeeper on what is available in the API. Someone posted that a Zenimax employee authored the add-on, which I am not certain of. I would be surprised, as Zenimax would not be pleased if someone copied their work. Yes, I know how we furnish our homes cannot be copywritten, but I am speaking of the principle of it.
SeaGtGruff wrote: »SpiritKitten wrote: »SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
That addon author is a ZOS employee.
So that absolves them of any personal responsibility for the addon and its features? If they were an Epic employee who wrote the addon in their personal time, would it become Epic's responsibility to maintain it? Is your employer responsible for any of your personal programming or written or artistic projects that you've done on your personal time?
SpiritKitten wrote: »SeaGtGruff wrote: »If it's an addon which is allowing players to actual copy/"steal" someone else's "build," then why isn't it the addon's author's responsibility to remove that from their addon? Why isn't everybody who's upset about that raising the issue with them?
Zenimax is the gatekeeper on what is available in the API. Someone posted that a Zenimax employee authored the add-on, which I am not certain of. I would be surprised, as Zenimax would not be pleased if someone copied their work. Yes, I know how we furnish our homes cannot be copywritten, but I am speaking of the principle of it.
He was hired by ZOS after he wrote the addon, and because of it. He was in the bottom right corner in the last live stream.