The Scam/Not a Scam debate storyline

[LordArtemis]

yeh I am hoping it's a simple and easy way for BW to really improve this situation.

 

That and the ability to post items for sale by a "per item" price as an option to go along with "buyout" price. That way it saves us from the need to do the math.

 

Sorry, had to plug my favorite suggestion.

[Chiklet]

I am coming to this discussion late because I don't generally pay attention to forums. However, I have been the victim of this exploit and I consider it an exploit for the very reasons already listed. Clearly people wouldn't list an item worth 1.7k credits for 1.7 million credits unless the system enables this scam.

 

I have just returned to SWTOR because of the special, and now I am ready to leave because the game encourages this kind of scam.

 

I am extremely unhappy with how the game management has responded to this issue.

[thewitchdoctor]

I am extremely unhappy with how the game management has responded to this issue.

 

What do you expect them to do? They responded with, frankly the correct response, that it is impossible for them to tell the difference between a legit post and a 'scam' post. Players are free to post an item for whatever they think it will sell. Bioware isn't going to remove that feature and set allowable prices.

 

He concluded saying he'd hand it over to the team to look at it. Contrary to what some armchair developers may say, a fix, and certainly not such a low-priority fix, isn't going to happen quickly.

 

Some people in here have posted some genuinely novel ideas. Or at least ones that minimize how much hand holding Bioware has to do.

 

But seriously, to quit because the UI in the GTN allows a douchetard to catch you unaware? Fine, whatever. But keep in mind that, ultimately, you are the one who presses the 'buy now' button and there is a dialogue box confirming the price. If you disabled it or ignored it ... well, don't do that until and if Bioware 'fixes' the GTN. And, even after they 'fix it,' pay attention!

Edited November 14, 2014 by thewitchdoctor

[HoloTweed]

It's only a minor inconvenience, because my current idea is to have the improved Purchase Confirmation only forced to pop up for purchases that are more expensive at 500k credits or more.

 

I mean honestly, how often does someone make a purchase of 500K credits or more? And what percentage of the people who have made accidental purchases on the GTN did it in blocks of 500K or more?

 

Wow. In a game where people can't be bothered with healing between fights so they can run to a next mob, you want to delay their GTN purchase because some people need their hand held?

 

Hmm. Gotta say "no." I don't care how much my purchase is for, I don't want any additional delay to make it. This idea is ALMOST as bad as that horrible suggestion that sellers be allowed to un-sell their product for 15 - 60 minutes AFTER it has already been purchased, because "oops."

 

I don't want to be inconvenienced IN THE SLIGHTEST because some people won't consciously take another 2 seconds to double-check a price. That said -

 

Changing to a two-digit decimal system doesn't inconvenience me.

Putting in a pop-up buy window with a delay that ONLY happens if you opt-in (because I don't want to uncheck a box on my umpty-million characters) doesn't inconvenience me.

Make text bigger, or colorful, or grayed out doesn't inconvenience me.

 

If something can be done that doesn't change my gameplay and somehow protects the GTN dummies, then I can't have any reasonable complaint or problem with it.

[LordArtemis]

Thanks for the input.

 

I think that the smaller changes, like the removal of fractional currency display would be relatively easy for the devs to implement, compared to some of the other suggestions on the list.

[anonnn]

Wow. In a game where people can't be bothered with healing between fights so they can run to a next mob, you want to delay their GTN purchase because some people need their hand held?

 

Hmm. Gotta say "no." I don't care how much my purchase is for, I don't want any additional delay to make it. This idea is ALMOST as bad as that horrible suggestion that sellers be allowed to un-sell their product for 15 - 60 minutes AFTER it has already been purchased, because "oops."

 

I don't want to be inconvenienced IN THE SLIGHTEST because some people won't consciously take another 2 seconds to double-check a price.

...

 

I noticed, you're not saying my solution isn't an effective solution. Because that's the only question that really needs answering. Along with, of course, whether it would be too much of an inconvenience to GTN users.

 

The amount of buyer protection my solution would provide in SWToR's GTN makes me smile a little on the inside... because I know how much less there would be to worry about when using the GTN. I could NEVER end up making a mistaken purchase for more than 250K credits.

Edited November 14, 2014 by anonnn

[LyraineAlei]

I noticed, you're not saying my solution isn't an effective solution. Because that's the only question that really needs answering. Along with, of course, whether it would be too much of an inconvenience to GTN users.

 

The amount of buyer protection my solution would provide in SWToR's GTN makes me smile a little on the inside... because I know how much less there would be to worry about when using the GTN. I could NEVER end up making a mistaken purchase for more than 250K credits.

 

Very well, yes. It would be effective. Until people started ignoring it because it was an inconvenience.

 

It would also require an in-depth overhaul of the current popup's set up.

 

Edit: Allow me to require myself as to why people would ignore the popup.

 

No matter how annoying and attention getting you make it, people will tune them our or ignore them.

 

Again, I point to my screaming child scenario.

 

Not to mention your suggestion, while a valid suggestion that could help prevent the problem, would require a serious overhaul of the current system. And such overhauls require a great deal of time (look at Disciplines, we've know about them for how long? And we are going to get them in almost two weeks).

 

Most of the other suggestions are less of an overhaul (setting auto-sort to lowest price, replacing just the total price fill in form box with a per-unit price box and so forth).

 

And no matter how long or short the bright! colorful! popup! will stick on the screen, people will ignore it. All colors used in such a manner are visual noise.

Edited November 14, 2014 by LyraineAlei

[anonnn]

...

Not to mention your suggestion, ... would require a serious overhaul of the current system. And such overhauls require a great deal of time ...

...

And no matter how long or short the bright! colorful! popup! will stick on the screen, people will ignore it. All colors used in such a manner are visual noise.

 

You have a lot of misperceptions regarding my proposed solution, I'm not sure how you don't realize it's guaranteed to be the simplest solution possible. This is because the changes required by the solution are not only extremely simplistic, but are constrained to a tiny window that has literally zero complexity with nothing more than some static text, an "OK" button, and a "Cancel" button. And the only mechanics IN that window is which of the 2 buttons the player decides to click. That makes this solution quickest to implement, quickest to test thoroughly, and the absolutely (unquestionably) least likely to bring about more bugs in the game.

 

And think about it... the first thing you noticed when you opened this forum post is that I highlighted something in lime-green. You maybe even glanced at it to read it first of anything.

[LyraineAlei]

You have a lot of misperceptions regarding my proposed solution, I'm not sure how you don't realize it's guaranteed to be the simplest solution possible. This is because the changes required by the solution are not only extremely simplistic, but are constrained to a tiny window that has literally zero complexity with nothing more than some static text, an "OK" button, and a "Cancel" button. And the only mechanics IN that window is which of the 2 buttons the player decides to click. That makes this solution quickest to implement, quickest to test thoroughly, and the absolutely (unquestionably) least likely to bring about more bugs in the game.

 

And think about it... the first thing you noticed when you opened this forum post is that I highlighted something in lime-green. You maybe even glanced at it to read it first of anything.

 

Actually I skipped over it. And then realized I missed something. So I hit the

button. If it isn't the same color as the base post (like those who type in all a different color than the default use the same color for the whole post) I tend to skip over things in bright unusual colors until I realize I missed something.

Take my personal favorite, the auto-sort.

 

What they have in place: Auto Sort to most recent posted listing.

So the autosort to lowest price could replace a couple of values [most recent] to a new one [lowest price].

 

No timers, no colors, not even a font resize option.

 

Your idea of "the best solution" does not balance with "convenience". Almost all of the other options balance players who are cautious' convenience with the hand holding those who fail to be cautious apparently think they need.

 

BTW: I was/am one of those people who highlight everything of not importance in my textbooks so that I automatically go to the important points, to take advantage of my color-skipping tendency.

Edited November 14, 2014 by LyraineAlei

[thewitchdoctor]

Very well, yes. It would be effective. Until people started ignoring it because it was an inconvenience.

 

Bingo.

 

You can add in all the fail safe safety features you want. And people will still click yes/whatever to get the dumb box out of their face so they can go back to playing.*

 

The best safety feature is learning: by figuring it out for yourself before getting 'scammed;' from hearing about it and not being 'scammed;' or being 'scammed' and learning your lesson.

 

*For 'proof:' dialogue boxes in evey FP past day 1 and every bloody EULA ever given to man.

 

Out of all the options given, honestly, just knocking out decimals and rounding down in favour of the player is the best and easiest. A GTN 2.0 would be nice, sure, to be more 'modern;' but a big flashing box in my face because a few people don't read the one that already pops up in your face? No thank you! Your feature to 'save' one would just annoy others - like me, for example. Any solution that is a mandatory pop-up box is just an annoyance to those that are already on top of their purchases. And since I am really positive it is only a few that get 'scammed,' such a solution to save the few at the annoyance of the many is, frankly, wrong. (And a hallmark of making Bioware into a baby sitter too).

[Kulyok]

What I'm seeing now on GTN(Red Eclipse) is players protecting other players against scammers.

 

How? Well, easy. The players see that lots of scammers are doing this disgusting thing with placing a single unit for one million or thereabouts. So they place one unit for 999.999.999(or 99 mil, I might be mistaken). This way even the hastiest players see that this is an item with a red price, the item they can't afford, and they see that items just below it are overpriced, too, so they sort correctly and buy the cheapest item.

 

I don't think it 's a good practice, I don't call it foolproof, and I don't condone it(honestly, I wish people just stopped scamming altogether and listed normal prices, expensive, but not one-mil-per-each-terenthium, but we can only dream), but it's certainly an interesting one.

[LordArtemis]

I am happy to see that even a few of the diehard "your fault" folks are starting to come around and see reason on some of the suggestions.

 

As I indicated, many of them have general QoL merit. Some of them do not, and some should not be considered due to being too punitive or annoying.

[anonnn]

...

Your idea of "the best solution" does not balance with "convenience". Almost all of the other options balance players who are cautious' convenience with the hand holding those who fail to be cautious apparently think they need.

....

 

The other solutions don't provide comprehensive buyer protection, is the point. Unless you're proposing a solution based on improving the existing Purchase Confirmation, you're just pushing a partial solution that's only going to protect buyers from a fraction of the GTN purchase mistakes they might make. Basically you're asking everyone to jump out of an airplane with half a parachute.

 

Not that display enhancements to the GTN search results won't help, sure it will. But you're suggesting scrapping the perfect solution to buyer protection just to suit your own minor convenience. When did you become so damned selfish?

[thewitchdoctor]

But you're suggesting scrapping the perfect solution to buyer protection just to suit your own minor convenience. When did you become so damned selfish?

 

Wait, what?

 

When did you get so arrogant?

 

Your 'perfect' solution is ... anything ... but.

 

As that poster and I expressed.

 

Are *we* a 100% right? No. But neither of us are calling our half-baked idea vetted in this echo chamber of a thread, 'perfect.'

 

This thread started as a joke war against the OP and has now become an echo chamber of a few folks armchair-developing their perfect solution to a (darn-well non-existant) problem.

 

Good derail, actually.

[Reno_Tarshil]

The other solutions don't provide comprehensive buyer protection, is the point. Unless you're proposing a solution based on improving the existing Purchase Confirmation, you're just pushing a partial solution that's only going to protect buyers from a fraction of the GTN purchase mistakes they might make. Basically you're asking everyone to jump out of an airplane with half a parachute.

 

Not that display enhancements to the GTN search results won't help, sure it will. But you're suggesting scrapping the perfect solution to buyer protection just to suit your own minor convenience. When did you become so damned selfish?

 

If it was the perfect solution people wouldn't be disregarding it.

[anonnn]

If it was the perfect solution people wouldn't be disregarding it.

 

You just lost ALL credibility . . .

[anonnn]

...

When did you get so arrogant?

Your 'perfect' solution is ... anything ... but.

As that poster and I expressed.

...

 

Which exact part seems arrogant to you? You posted incorrect information then, and you're posting incorrect information now. If you can't handle a technical discussion and keep the concepts clear in your head, then this topic is not for you.

[thewitchdoctor]

Which exact part seems arrogant to you? You posted incorrect information then, and you're posting incorrect information now. If you can't handle a technical discussion and keep the concepts clear in your head, then this topic is not for you.

 

When you called another 'selfish' because they don't think your 'perfect' solution is 'perfect?'

 

I thought I made that plainly clear.

 

And do not try to belittle me, it only [edited] highlights that you are well off point.

Edited November 14, 2014 by thewitchdoctor

[Reno_Tarshil]

You just lost ALL credibility . . .

 

For disagreeing with you and pointing out the obvious? Lol, okay.

[anonnn]

When you called another 'selfish' because they don't think your 'perfect' solution is 'perfect?'

 

I thought I made that plainly clear.

...

 

Then put your money where your mouth is. Make a technical discussion of it rather than just make empty statements.

 

What EXACTLY is deficient about the solution I'm proposing? Because from where I'm looking, an enhanced Purchase Confirmation will be there protecting a GTN Buyer during EVERY large purchase they make. The person who lost 5M credits? Protected. The person who lost 50M credits? Protected.

 

And that's not a guess.

[anonnn]

For disagreeing with you and pointing out the obvious? Lol, okay.

If it was the perfect solution people wouldn't be disregarding it.

 

If that's what constitutes evidence for you, then your problems are quite severe. Try being a little more academic instead of a mindless pack animal.

Edited November 14, 2014 by anonnn

[LordArtemis]

The list so far, as agreed to by those that have commented on the options they wish to have on the list and those they wish to disregard, either because they were too punitive or likely to be rejected by the playerbase as annoyances.

 

IMO Buyers and Sellers have to both take responsibility for their behavior. Since most were unwilling to do that, this argument continued for some time despite the efforts of some folks to just discuss the merits of the suggestions as QoL improvements for the GTN. It appears many folks are more willing to look at the suggestions now to judge them on QoL merit only.

 

Here are most of the non-punitive suggestions made during the discussion.

 

1) The ability to ignore a character name on the GTN, so the items sold by that character are not shown in searches.

2) The ability to place a red flag on sellers you do not like, green flag on ones you prefer, and a sort function to move red flags to the bottom of a search, green flags to the top. Only you would see the flags you apply.

3) Remove the ability for the system to display fractional currency in the "price per unit" field.

4) Have the formatting right justified instead of left justified.

5) Have the ignore list also apply to the GTN.

6) Add a price per unit option for posting items for sale.

7) Default the GTN to sorting by lowest price first, or lowest per unit price.

8) Larger text for the price display.

9) Add a toggle to remove the display of fractional currency in the "price per item" field.

10) Line up all prices on the decimal, and display .00 for non fractional amounts.

11) Option to apply a maximum buyout price threshold to warn players if they exceed set amount in the purchase.

12) Optional to apply a maximum per item price threshold to warn players if they exceed set amount in the purchase.

 

 

I support 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. I really like 2, 6 and 9. 6 seems to be the most popular one so far. I don't see the harm in 11 and 12, so they are included for folks to discuss, though I would not rate it as one of my favorite in the list.

 

If I missed any you guys think should be added to the list, let me know.

Edited November 14, 2014 by LordArtemis

[Reno_Tarshil]

If that's what constitutes evidence for you, then your problems are quite severe. Try being a little more academic instead of a mindless pack animal.

 

And you should learn to take a hint. If people liked your idea it would be discussed. Instead it's not and you keep trying to force it down people's throats at the solution. The more you try to do this, the more people are going to continue to ignore you.

 

It's not the 100% perfect solution, so move on.

[thewitchdoctor]

If that's what constitutes evidence for you, then your problems are quite severe. Try being a little more academic instead of a mindless pack animal.

 

Right on, buddy. Thank you for highlighting just what an 'academic' solution you have found.

 

This is what passes for your 'perfect' solution standing on its merit? Kindergarten-playground-level 'neener-neener?'

[thewitchdoctor]

Then put your money where your mouth is. Make a technical discussion of it rather than just make empty statements.

 

What EXACTLY is deficient about the solution I'm proposing? Because from where I'm looking, an enhanced Purchase Confirmation will be there protecting a GTN Buyer during EVERY large purchase they make. The person who lost 5M credits? Protected. The person who lost 50M credits? Protected.

 

And that's not a guess.

 

ALWAYS pop up when the purchase is 250K or more, with a 5-second delay on enabling the "OK" button.

 

I did, but here is the 'academic' version: a mandatory 5-second dialogue box.

 

A. Mandatory. 5-second. Dialogue. Box.

 

Every. Time. I. Spend. My. Money.

 

No thank you. That isn't a perfect solution, it is just annoying.

 

You seem to think 5 seconds won't be long. But having to count down 5 seconds for every large purchase I make, just to hit 'OK.' No thank you. I don't need your 'saving' if it makes shopping 'annoying.'

 

EDIT: before you get pedantic. I spend more than 250K at one pop often.

Edited November 14, 2014 by thewitchdoctor