create a new 'Purchase Alert' to protect GTN buyers

[SelinaH]

Okay, serious question: Do you think I am merely trolling you?

 

If you think my questions are trolling, then you couldn't be more incorrect. The very questions I asked, are the ones that will be considered by a development team before a single line of code is added to the game to change GTN functionality.

Well, he/she hasn't even put me on ignore yet (to my knowledge), so I can't imagine that you would be on the list. The troll-o-meter needs some recalibration, methinks.

 

In your opinion, what's the first thing on your list that a dev team would look at to determine whether a particular issue is an appropriate project to tackle? Do the questions appear in order of importance, or just as you remembered them?

[azudelphi]

Well, he/she hasn't even put me on ignore yet (to my knowledge), so I can't imagine that you would be on the list. The troll-o-meter needs some recalibration, methinks.

 

In your opinion, what's the first thing on your list that a dev team would look at to determine whether a particular issue is an appropriate project to tackle? Do the questions appear in order of importance, or just as you remembered them?

 

Generally, I listed them in an order that I thought would be a logical process for determining a change to the GTN for the purposes of mitigating accidental purchases. Step 1 of course, was finding a way to determine the rate of accidents, then analyzing the rate of accidents and determining acceptable ranges.

 

Personally, I think the critical aspect of the process is to determine what is an acceptable rate of "accident" over a set of magnitudes.

 

As examples:

Is 1:1000 acceptable for an accidental purchase of items listed at <10k? Is 1:1000000 acceptable for an accidental purchase of items listed at > 10 mil? Because quite frankly, you can never reach GTN perfection; people will make mistakes so long as they have the freedom to make a decision that can result in a mistake.

 

The hardest part of course being, how do you determine what is truly an accident and what is merely a case of buyer's remorse? That, in itself, is a significant amount of time. Analytics for GTN changing and optimization are probably the hidden development cost. Because implementing a feature with no way to tell if it is going to be a success or is a success seems irresponsible.

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[anonnn]

Generally, I listed them in an order that I thought would be a logical process for determining a change to the GTN for the purposes of mitigating accidental purchases. Step 1 of course, was finding a way to determine the rate of accidents, then analyzing the rate of accidents and determining acceptable ranges.

...

 

Just to humor you I went back and reviewed your list of questions. I realized that the first time I read the list I only read the first 3 questions and stopped reading. Which turned out to be the correct instinct, because when I got to the question about determining whether people are drunk while surfing the GTN I realized you're just here blatantly trolling to get your jollies.

 

Spare me your ridiculous clownish nonsense and stop bashing and drowning my Suggestion with your voluminous disingenuous drivel.

[anonnn]

That's not a metaphor.

 

That's improper forum etiquette. Which IS important to get exactly right.

 

Kindly delete the full-include from your post which is ridiculously unnecessary.

[PatT]

No one's saying there isn't already something in place. The problem is that what's already in place isn't good enough... which is clearly evidenced from the fact that people have still made accidental purchases for HUGE sums of credits. I simply have clarity enough to realize how to fix the problem.

 

I see.

 

It's good that you posted a picture of it, because now there's something visual to illustrate the current problem:

.

• There's nothing to alert the buyer when the item they're about to buy is particularly expensive.
   
  Sure there is. You're eyes.
  
• The dialog can be dismissed as soon as it pops up.
  .
   
  I disagree. Just because you miss it, doesn't mean it is missable. You're not reading. Perhaps more you're using a bot that cant differentiate?
  

 

I expect a higher level of quality than a lot of people, that's all. Since the purchase confirmation mechanism is clearly insufficient, it needs to be improved ASAP so more players don't have these GTN accidents.

 

It's only inefficient if you're buying in massive bulk, and perhaps using a bot to do so that can't differentiate. We can easily establish by your complaints that you have enough credits to make the purchase. The only ones who do are people who don't play the game, only the GTN. And you're all breaking the game for the rest of us. No sympathy. NO CHANGES.

 

 

 

The only deciding point is whether players are still making accidental GTN purchases for large amounts of credits. And no one is debating that this is still happening.

However as someone with repair bills, gear bills and other expenses, there's also no debating that you're not playing anything but the gtn, and only to get rich, and to heck with those of us who actually buy things we need there. I can't even work up the littlest sympathy. I believ eyou're using a bot to purchase, or you'd be reading it. Yoru bot is dismissing things. Poor you.

[Renarkis]

That's improper forum etiquette. Which IS important to get exactly right.

 

Kindly delete the full-include from your post which is ridiculously unnecessary.

 

Funny you should say that.

[azudelphi]

Just to humor you I went back and reviewed your list of questions. I realized that the first time I read the list I only read the first 3 questions and stopped reading. Which turned out to be the correct instinct, because when I got to the question about determining whether people are drunk while surfing the GTN I realized you're just here blatantly trolling to get your jollies.

 

Spare me your ridiculous clownish nonsense and stop bashing and drowning my Suggestion with your voluminous disingenuous drivel.

 

Really? You don't think Bioware should take the voluntary state of mind of a player into account?

 

To use your Subaru example / anecdote / parable (whatever you want to more correctly call it; a metaphor is the use of a figure of speech), was the driver drunk? Because if the driver was under the influence, Subaru has to wonder if there was really a problem with the vehicle... also, why did they call Subaru? Why not their insurance company? In your tale, we never actually found out why the car was in an accident either! Was the driver speeding? Was the driver tired? Was it the fault of another driver?

 

But okay, take the drunk one off the list and ignore your parable. What others did you have a concern with? I will ask you this 100% honestly, do you think that Bioware will make a change to the GTN (which currently has full functionality) without any ability to gather metrics on its functionality post-modification? Specifically, do you believe that Bioware can / would do so without the ability to determine if the change they make actually has an impact?

 

Do you also believe that Bioware will make a change that has had generally mixed to negative reviews?

 

These are serious, non-trolling questions; I will assume if you brand these questions (the ones in this post if you are unwilling to answer the others) as trolling that you are incapable of answering them or are trolling yourself. They are absolutely the kind of questions that have to be asked of any change to the primary game systems. This is especially true as the GTN is one of the few that is functional at the moment. PVE / PVP are currently having issues... the GTN works fine; if they botched a change to the GTN, SWTOR is dead.

 

 

 

And you can dismiss me as a troll. Such is your right. You are incorrect though.

 

I stand by my words here. If you can't let your idea be subject to some mild criticism, then your idea isn't a good one. Not necessarily based on your intent (which I genuinely believe is some degree of a noble one), but because so far your primary response to criticism has been something to the effect of, "Well, if you don't see why I am a genius, you're an idiot"... which will not convince other players to give vocal support for your idea; and vocal support is needed for Bioware to take it seriously.

 

I am sorry you think it's trolling, but you really need to take a look in the mirror... because you are basically a condescending-machine...

 

 

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[branmakmuffin]

I realized the logic of the opposition to this thread can be summarized by the following metaphor:

 

[...]

 

Do y'all feel like complete idiots yet . . . ? . You'll get there. . If you have any trace of humanity left.

Did I miss something, or did you seriously just try to say that not having confirmation dialog boxes for buying virtual swag in a computer game is analogous to hard-to-fasten seat belts?

 

I hope you were trying to make a joke and I just missed some earlier post setting it up.

Edited January 28, 2015 by branmakmuffin

[Rusah]

.

 

Your idea was to keep the ON/OFF switch for the Purchase Confirmation dialog. Which makes it compelling to repeat myself so the logistics of the required solution will become more clear to you:

 

Most (if not all) GTN accidents are due to one of two failures in the purchase process:

 

No it was not, at no point was that what i suggested at all, you are either misreading or purposfully twisting my words

 

The truth is that you (and obviously all the other trolls) are only concerned with one thing. You don't want your GTN experience to be allowed to change in any way. It is you who is uncompromising, and since the impact on your GTN experience would in fact be very minimal, it amounts to you being both selfish and extremely unthoughtful towards others (the players who will end up being the next victims of GTN accidents).

 

Gee what a suprise i make a suggestion for a modification that serves your aims and those that do not want it, and yet again you go throwing insults calling people trolls. Plus how is a suggestion that gives you what you want and allows others to turn it off if not wanted uncomprimising. You want to see someone who is uncomprimising look in a mirror, you refuse to consider other points and insult anyone that does not agree, and ignore any suggested tweaks.

 

Perhaps your problem lies somewhere in your confusion of the nature of these GTN accidents. It's not a small group of people who are stupid and careless and who keep making the same mistake over and over. It's more like a lightning strike, that there's always a next victim of these lightning strikes, but once someone ends up a victim of a GTN accident and loses millions of credits, they learn their lesson and likely never make the same mistake again because they've formed better GTN habits. But there's always more players who haven't yet realized how easily it is to have a GTN accident and lose a ton of credits. What you're suggesting is that lightning rods to protect the players from future lightning strikes should be outlawed. Which makes you extremely unthoughful and careless towards the player community.

 

Again twisting my words that is not what i said at all, and my suggestion addressed this point you just ignored it again.

 

And the only reason you want to outlaw lightning rods is that you don't want to be inconvenienced in the slight way that my solution would involve. Even though my solution would prevent the vast majority of future GTN accidents. You actually want to pretend that a 3-second delayed Purchase Confirmation dialog for your purchases 250K+ would be some kind of a problem for you. Even though it would prevent an entire future of GTN accident victims from becoming victims in the first place.

 

Did you even read what i posted, the deley would be on by default, giving that protection and people would have to choose to turn it off, you would have your delay.

 

Maybe instead you should choose to be civil towards the player community and see the value in supporting changes to the game that would ensure that future GTN buyers are protected (in a very substantial way) from the possibility of making an honest mistake and becoming the victim of a catastrophic GTN accident.

 

Civil, take a look at your own behavior before accusing people of that, you have been insulting and belittleing people and tossing out backhanded insults constantly.

 

I am being civil towards the community as i state again, your purchase would be on by default, giving those that ned it protection which is being civil to them.

 

It could be OPTIONALLY turned off, which is being civil towards those that don't want it.

 

 

Let me recap

We put in your time delay, color coding, all of it as you want it, litereally every single part of the time delay you want is put in.

 

By default it is turned on, this way everyone has it from the start, everyone has your devised protectuion measures exactly as you want them.

 

An OPTION is added in preferances to turn the time delay confirmation off, those that do not want/need it turn it off. Those that are victims as you put it leave it ON. They get their protection soi they don't make these mistake, those that do not want it get to choose to turn it off.

 

How exactly am i not being civil when making a suggestion that gives you everything you want, and appeases those that do not want it by giving them the optional choice to turn it off, seriously, answetr this question how exactly is that not being civil to the players?

Edited January 28, 2015 by Rusah

[anonnn]

Not a single troll is remaining on-topic and posting even a single thing that's contributory towards the topic of the thread. If you're not going to contribute, don't post.

 

Players are losing credits in GTN accidents. This needs to be fixed ASAP.

My suggestion would be a perfect fix for this problem. If you don't have any useful suggestions of how to improve my idea (and keep it effective, obviously) then don't post.

[azudelphi]

Not a single troll is remaining on-topic and posting even a single thing that's contributory towards the topic of the thread. If you're not going to contribute, don't post.

 

Players are losing credits in GTN accidents. This needs to be fixed ASAP.

My suggestion would be a perfect fix for this problem. If you don't have any useful suggestions of how to improve my idea (and keep it effective, obviously) then don't post.

 

Discussion of an idea is inherently constructive.

 

Just because you don't want to respond to critics, does not discredit your critics.

[Rusah]

Not a single troll is remaining on-topic and posting even a single thing that's contributory towards the topic of the thread. If you're not going to contribute, don't post.

 

Players are losing credits in GTN accidents. This needs to be fixed ASAP.

My suggestion would be a perfect fix for this problem. If you don't have any useful suggestions of how to improve my idea (and keep it effective, obviously) then don't post.

 

Maybe you missed this below, yet again you didn't comment on what i said and made more accusations of trolling against people, tho how making a suggestion based on your idea and responding to your comments is trolling i would love to know, and you ignored a direct question i asked you, also quoted below, care to answer it this time?

 

You are just saying that anyone that does not agree with you is troling and not staying ontopic, you just refuse to discuss it, refuse any modifications and try to twist things to make anyone that does not agree out to be bad guys/gals. You clearly do not want to discuss options and suggestions you just want blind agreement on everything you say. This is a suggestion forum., ie a place of discussion, you post your idea people discuss it until a way comes up everyone agrees with, that is the whole point of a forum, and has been way back to the times of the aincent greek forums back in bc times.

 

Let me recap

We put in your time delay, color coding, all of it as you want it, litereally every single part of the time delay you want is put in.

 

By default it is turned on, this way everyone has it from the start, everyone has your devised protectuion measures exactly as you want them.

 

An OPTION is added in preferances to turn the time delay confirmation off, those that do not want/need it turn it off. Those that are victims as you put it leave it ON. They get their protection soi they don't make these mistake, those that do not want it get to choose to turn it off.

 

How exactly am i not being civil when making a suggestion that gives you everything you want, and appeases those that do not want it by giving them the optional choice to turn it off, seriously, answetr this question how exactly is that not being civil to the players?

 

How exactly am i not being civil when making a suggestion that gives you everything you want, and appeases those that do not want it by giving them the optional choice to turn it off, seriously, answetr this question how exactly is that not being civil to the players?

 

How exactly is that not contributing, is is a suggested tweak to your idea.

How is that not on topic it is a suggestion for a reasonable compromise, based along the lines of your own idea.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Rusah

[azudelphi]

Maybe you missed this below, yet again you didn't comment on what i said and made more accusations of trolling against people

 

How rexactly is ythat not contributing, is is a suggested tweak to your idea.

How is that not on topic it is a suggestion for a reasonable compromise, basred along the lines of your own idea.

 

Because, to the OP, your change makes his change ineffective.

 

It's either mandatory for 5 seconds, or mandatory for 3 seconds. OP believes the effectiveness comes from the forced delay. Removing the forced delay in any way, means that people who turn it off have no protection.

 

On this, he has made it abundantly clear there is no room for compromise. Sadly, this is why his idea won't see the light of day.

[Rusah]

Because, to the OP, your change makes his change ineffective.

 

It's either mandatory for 5 seconds, or mandatory for 3 seconds. OP believes the effectiveness comes from the forced delay. Removing the forced delay in any way, means that people who turn it off have no protection.

 

On this, he has made it abundantly clear there is no room for compromise. Sadly, this is why his idea won't see the light of day.

 

I know, every time i post i know. I have no idea why i keep coming back here and trying to have a civilized discussion for a reasonable compromise that is effective for both sides, when the response is just more insults and accusations of trolling thrown at me. Guess i am just a glutton for punishment.

 

The sad thing is i do think that his idea of a delay is valid to help people, i agree with that part, i just disagree with there being no option to turn it off for those that do not need it. Why can we not discuss a way to suit both sides?

 

The op coulda seriously replied discussed the merits/drawbacks of my tweak then i coulda read it gone of that suggested a way based along my and his post and so on until we came up with something that worked for all, instead slander and trolling accusations and repeating the same statement over and over.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Rusah

[ScarletBlaze]

There is a confirmation in game already for this:

 

[Preferences:

General

Display Item Purchase Warning

If you do not have it turn on then it is up to you to turn it on.

 

If someone turns this off then they have taken responsibility to be held accountable for their actions, since they have essentially turned off the protection in place already to keep people from buying something they wouldn't have brought normally.

 

 

 

 

When you go to purchase an item you will get a pop up box:

 

Are you sure that you want to buy (item name) for (amount of credits)?

 

Yes..... No...................

Edited January 28, 2015 by ScarletBlaze

[DOHboy]

Not a single troll is remaining on-topic and posting even a single thing that's contributory towards the topic of the thread. If you're not going to contribute, don't post.

 

Players are losing credits in GTN accidents. This needs to be fixed ASAP.

My suggestion would be a perfect fix for this problem. If you don't have any useful suggestions of how to improve my idea (and keep it effective, obviously) then don't post.

 

no people are losing credits because they don't pay attention. asking to improve a 'solution' to a problem that doesn't exist outside of user error is irrelevant. There is no solution to a problem that exists only in a personal nature.

 

If a person is incapable of not putting their hand on a hot stove, does not mean we should demand all stoves be induction based. Perhaps that person just needs to be more careful. The stove is not at fault, the user is.

 

If 99% of the community can perfectly function on the GTN without making huge errors and lapses of judgement it is not worth 1 minute of time of the devs to implement a "solution" for a "problem" that effects only 1% of the community and only once (I would hope they learn their lesson the first time).

 

There can be no Improvement to your suggestion because the underlying premise is incorrect. There is no problem requiring a solution, that can be fixed outside of personal responsibility. Take responsibility for your own actions, rather than have someone else try to prevent you from doing something. Freedom, thats how it works!

[Feargal]

If 99% of the community can perfectly function on the GTN without making huge errors and lapses of judgement it is not worth 1 minute of time of the devs to implement a "solution" for a "problem" that effects only 1% of the community and only once (I would hope they learn their lesson the first time).

 

Without stats to back it up, I suspect the percentage of GTN mistakes is far lower than 1%, but I appreciate your point.

[DOHboy]

Without stats to back it up, I suspect the percentage of GTN mistakes is far lower than 1%, but I appreciate your point.

 

I was trying to be generous. Of the millions of transactions a day on the GTN I would expect it to be significantly less than 1% by orders of magnitude less.

[g_land]

And since I'm both highly intelligent and a lot more careful than the average person, I understand that a GTN accident could happen to anyone.

 

After reading all of the OP's "arguments," statements of carelessness, inability to provide any data to support his assertions, and downright refusal to engage in a discussion with anyone who does not share his view other than to insult them; does anybody else doubt the validity of the quoted statement.

[g_land]

I was trying to be generous. Of the millions of transactions a day on the GTN I would expect it to be significantly less than 1% by orders of magnitude less.

 

Seeing as how such a small percentage of people use the forums of any game and the in turn small percentage of people who support measures like th OP'S or claim to have been scammed, I would think that your guess is highly probable.

[Rankyn]

How is this thread even still going?

 

It's clear that 1) people don't like the idea and 2) the OP is too stubborn to let it go, even in the face of overwhelming criticism.

 

I suggest everyone just downvote the thread and move on to other topics.

[anonnn]

I was trying to be generous. Of the millions of transactions a day on the GTN I would expect it to be significantly less than 1% by orders of magnitude less.

 

If you want to be technical about it, the % of transactions means absolutely nothing... it's a garbage stat. What matters is the # of players that have experienced a serious GTN accident. If you convert it to a % you're just diluting the significance of the statistic and pretending that more people in the community should make individual rights less of a significance. Which clearly is the over-reaching rationale behind a lot of the contrary opinions to my suggestion, which is of course indicative of widespread apathy towards individual player's rights amongst this crowd that's trolling in this thread. Which means we'll be listening to MY opinion on this topic, not any of yours'.

 

Clearly you're all new to the idea of consideration of the rights of other players.

Edited January 28, 2015 by anonnn

[JPryde]

Clearly you're all new to the idea of consideration of the rights of other players.

fine, fine, we heard you.... everytime that you repeated yourself, regardless of you calling anyone a troll, who is simply disagreeing with you.

 

Now please tell me, how you consider the rights of individual players to voluntarily turn off a security measure by their own conscious decision?

 

Why are you demanding a solution that enforces a system on anyone and call anyone in disagreement to be hurting the rights of other players?

 

I personally do not want another confirmation dialogue... and I wouldn't mind, if there were a dozen in place to make you happy, as long as they are not enforced on me. So please answer me, how your demand to make me click your alert would protect my rights and not hurt them?

[azudelphi]

fine, fine, we heard you.... everytime that you repeated yourself, regardless of you calling anyone a troll, who is simply disagreeing with you.

 

Now please tell me, how you consider the rights of individual players to voluntarily turn off a security measure by their own conscious decision?

 

Why are you demanding a solution that enforces a system on anyone and call anyone in disagreement to be hurting the rights of other players?

 

I personally do not want another confirmation dialogue... and I wouldn't mind, if there were a dozen in place to make you happy, as long as they are not enforced on me. So please answer me, how your demand to make me click your alert would protect my rights and not hurt them?

 

Generally speaking, I wouldn't care one way or the other if it were something I can disable.

 

However, OP seems adamant that it be mandatory and then only allow variation on the duration. It's a rather silly hardline stance to take, considering he'd actually get support (you and Rusah have already done so and I would add myself to the mix) if would accept the reasonable compromise put forth.

 

I am genuinely starting to question whether OP is serious or intentionally being obtuse...

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[DOHboy]

Generally speaking, I wouldn't care one way or the other if it were something I can disable.

 

However, OP seems adamant that it be mandatory and then only allow variation on the duration. It's a rather silly hardline stance to take, considering he'd actually get support (you and Rusah have already done so and I would add myself to the mix) if would accept the reasonable compromise put forth.

 

I am genuinely starting to question whether OP is serious or intentionally being obtuse...

 

some kid(s) trip on their untied shoelaces and hit their heads...OP makes statement to mandate all kids must have velco shoes and wear helmets and you have to wonder if being obtuse?