create a new 'Purchase Alert' to protect GTN buyers

[azudelphi]

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?

 

I was giving OP the benefit of the doubt, but when you phrase it like that... seems I am being incredibly generous.

[anonnn]

Here's a list of the most common arguments against this thread. They're all completely weak arguments and are simply ignorant of the problem needing to be solved and the technical workings of my suggested solution, but here are these arguments so people won't keep repeating them as if they're a useful point of debate:

.

 

I don't want any Purchase Confirmation dialog forced on me.

 

Guaranteeing that a Purchase Confirmation dialog pops up (for only the expensive purchases) is the ONLY way that these GTN mistakes will be stopped. The entire purpose for the Purchase Confirmation was to stop players from having GTN accidents. And it's a non-solution to say that players just need to learn to read the GTN display to keep themselves from becoming a victim of a GTN accident.

.

The only place a purchase can be verified is AFTER the 'Buy' button is clicked and BEFORE the purchase is finalized. THAT'S the Purchase Confirmation dialog. The place where GTN accidents are prevented.

.

This suggested solution is to have a guaranteed Purchase Confirmation only for expensive purchases. So the inconvenience to players when using the GTN is extremely minimal.

 

 

There's already a tool to prevent GTN mistakes.

 

People using this argument are careless and neglected to read the original post. The entire context of the suggestion is to IMPROVE the current Purchase Confirmation so that these GTN mistakes (that are clearly happening on a regular basis) don't happen any more in the future.

.

It's a very simple situation. The Purchase Confirmation has been in place for the entire game. And yet major GTN accidents have happened anyway. It's extremely obvious that the Purchase Confirmation is inadequate and needs to be improved. There's a certain obligation for the game features to prevent honest mistakes that cause catastrophe for the individual player.

 

 

Only stupid players make that mistake.

 

You lose all points for bashing on the victims of GTN accidents, and you're not welcome to post further in this thread. It's the purpose of the Purchase Confirmation to PREVENT the GTN accidents from happening in the first place, so if there are still GTN accidents happening (and there obviously are), then improving the Purchase Confirmation is the very obvious solution to the problem.

.

Improving the Purchase Confirmation feature is obligatory by even minimal ethical standards.

 

 

It's the player's fault for not checking the price.

 

In fact it's just as easy to say it's entirely the game design's fault that these GTN accidents happen, because the entire PURPOSE of the Purchase Confirmation was and always will be to prevent these GTN accidents.

.

But because I've provided a solution to improve the Purchase Confirmation that's simple and that minimizes the inconvenience to all players and that'll prevent any future GTN accidents, the topic of fault is a moot point anyway. By ethical standards, there's a certain level of obligation to go ahead and make this change so that no more players have to have their game experience ruined by the weak design of the Purchase Confirmation.

 

 

That's their problem. It doesn't need to be changed.

 

Apathy towards the well-being of other players is a form of sociopathy, and it shouldn't be tolerated on the forums.

 

 

It's unfair to make us click a Purchase Confirmation just because people can't check prices correctly.

 

You can't demand that the player community be retrained to use the GTN properly since it's not feasible to do so. The Purchase Confirmation IS the part of the game that's responsible for preventing GTN accidents. So if GTN accidents are occurring, the thing to fix is the Purchase Confirmation.

.

Saying that players just need to learn to read the existing Purchase Confirmation is both a blatant admission of its inadequacy (it shouldn't require training) and a severe neglect of the problem of GTN accidents that are guaranteed to keep happening in the future.

 

 

Your suggestion just needs to get rid of the delay, then players are happy with it.

 

You should bother to study the solution so you even understand how it works before you post any comments. The delay on the 'OK' button of the Purchase Confirmation is the ENTIRE FOUNDATION of the solution. The color-coded price that's triggered by various price levels is entirely dependent on the 'OK' button delay in order for the bright text of the price to even be noticed in the first place. And the delay on the 'OK' button is the entire mechanism by which players will no longer be able to click 'OK' before they've genuinely verified the purchase price.

.

Suggesting that the delay be removed reveals that you've chosen to understand neither the problem nor the solution.

 

 

 

If it's allowed to be still switched off in Preferences, players are happy with it.

 

You clearly don't understand the problem or this suggested solution. Not only is the ability to switch it off half of the entire problem, my suggestion is for the Purchase Confirmation to be guaranteed to pop up only for expensive purchases. So the inconvenience to players will be extremely minimal.

.

The average player doesn't even make a purchase for 250k+ in a typical day, so the improved Purchase Confirmation dialog wouldn't even be noticed most days. It would only show up when it's truly needed, when an expensive item has been click to 'Buy' and it's not necessarily what the player meant to click on or for the price they thought they saw.

.

It's the responsibility of the Purchase Confirmation feature to provide a reliable, infallible, and noncircumventable mechanism to verify the player's purchase as soon as the player clicks a 'Buy' button on the GTN.

 

 

 

.

So there's the list. NONE of these arguments are effective arguments against improving the Purchase Confirmation dialog in the way I've suggested. No one should be reposting these weak arguments again in this Suggestion Box thread.

 

Kindly follow the forum rules and keep discussion in this thread ON TOPIC. And I already know the strategies of forum trolls, so I'll remind you that there's a huge difference between criticism and insult. I've seen an endless stream of trolls in this thread showing up to do nothing more than spew insults.

.

 

.

Suggestion Box Forum Guidelines

.

Rules Of Conduct

Edited January 28, 2015 by anonnn

[anonnn]

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?

 

Exactly wrong. I've only suggested an improvement of the existing Purchase Confirmation to change it from being inadequate as it is now, to in the future being extremely effective in preventing GTN accidents and thus preventing a regular occurrence of individual players becoming extremely unhappy with their game experience.

[Renarkis]

Pontification

 

Really, this has gone on too long.

[azudelphi]

Exactly wrong. I've only suggested an improvement of the existing Purchase Confirmation to change it from being inadequate as it is now, to in the future being extremely effective in preventing GTN accidents and thus preventing a regular occurrence of individual players becoming extremely unhappy with their game experience.

 

You have suggested a modification to an existing feature that is sure to give the the majority of players a worse game experience (through a mandatory annoyance) to protect an incredibly small number of people from an unhappy one.

 

By the way, I would recommend you be careful with the forum guidelines and the suggestion box guidelines. You have already had at least one post removed and you frequently insult your dissenters. We are not lacking in intelligence, our opinion and perspectives vary from yours.

 

Edit: It isn't apathy either. It's practicality. I don't believe subjecting ~1 million players per month (or whatever the December / January numbers are) to your design in order to protect < 1000 people from a mistake is pragmatic.

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[anonnn]

You have suggested a modification to an existing feature that is sure to give the average player a worse game experience to protect an incredibly small number of people from an unhappy one.

 

By the way, I would recommend you be careful with the forum guidelines and the suggestion box guidelines. You have already had at least one post removed and you frequently insult your dissenters. We are not lacking in intelligence, our opinion and perspectives vary from yours.

 

You're one of the biggest offenders ... you should stop posting since you're contributing close to nothing constructive to this thread.

 

This thread is the search for an effective solution that will hopefully stop 100% of GTN accidents. If you're not on board with that objective, then you don't belong posting in this thread since that's the purpose and topic of this thread. If you object to this thread, then state that ONCE and stop posting. If you continue to pontificate in this thread then you're blatantly breaking the forum rules and performing and obvious flood-it-with-hate-to-kill-the-thread perpetration on my Suggestion Box thread here... along with all the other trolls.

[Renarkis]

This thread is pointless. If you're not on board with that objective, then you don't belong posting in this thread since that's the purpose and topic of this thread. If you object to this thread, then state that ONCE and stop posting.

 

This is actually a good point. The arguments have been made. It's not necessary to keep on objecting. It only leads to pointless bickering.

[azudelphi]

You're one of the biggest offenders ... you should stop posting since you're contributing close to nothing constructive to this thread.

 

This thread is the search for an effective solution that will hopefully stop 100% of GTN accidents. If you're not on board with that objective, then you don't belong posting in this thread since that's the purpose and topic of this thread. If you object to this thread, then state that ONCE and stop posting. If you continue to pontificate in this thread then you're blatantly breaking the forum rules and performing and obvious flood-it-with-hate-to-kill-the-thread perpetration on my Suggestion Box thread here... along with all the other trolls.

 

I have been constructive. I asked reasonable questions about how you established your premise and how you came to the conclusion that your idea is the most effective. You dismissed them (in a rude, condescending, and insulting manner); not even answering some of the most critical in diagnosing and rectifying a GTN issue.

 

So here are the most important ones again:

1. What is the estimated current rate of erroneous purchases on the GTN?

2. How did you reach this estimate?

3. What is the acceptable rate of erroneous purchases on the GTN?

4. How did you reach this limit?

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[azudelphi]

pontificate . . . . to speak in a pompous or dogmatic manner

 

pompous . . . . characterized by an ostentatious display of dignity or importance

 

ostentatious . . . . characterized by or given to pretentious or conspicuous show in an attempt to impress others

 

dogmatic . . . . asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner; opinionated

 

arrogant . . . . making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud

.

 

Please try and stay on topic.

 

I refer you once again to the 4 questions I posed before this post.

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[Renarkis]

pontificate . . . . to speak in a pompous or dogmatic manner

 

pompous . . . . characterized by an ostentatious display of dignity or importance

 

ostentatious . . . . characterized by or given to pretentious or conspicuous show in an attempt to impress others

 

dogmatic . . . . asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner; opinionated

 

arrogant . . . . making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud

.

 

I'm not sure if you're insulting me or showing a surprising degree of self-awareness. Look, I've made my stance clear. I'll leave this alone.

[anonnn]

... I asked reasonable questions about how you established your premise and how you came to the conclusion that your idea is the most effective.

...

 

No, you're being pedantic to bury the thread in a huge volume of useless minutia (trifles).

 

The only thing you should be concerned with is are individual players still having a horrible game experience because they had another GTN accident? THAT'S the purpose of this thread. To find a real solution to this problem.

 

If you look at the size of your original list of questions, I think even you might be shocked at how many ridiculous off-topic questions you posted to this thread.

[SelinaH]

It only leads to pointless bickering.

.

[anonnn]

I'm not sure if you're insulting me or showing a surprising degree of self-awareness. Look, I've made my stance clear. I'll leave this alone.

 

You asked what "pontification" means. If you're not going to contribute anything to this thread you should not be posting in the first place.

[azudelphi]

No, you're being pedantic to bury the thread in a huge volume of useless minutia (trifles).

 

The only thing you should be concerned with is are individual players still having a horrible game experience because they had another GTN accident? THAT'S the purpose of this thread. To find a real solution to this problem.

 

If you look at the size of your original list of questions, I think even you might be shocked at how many ridiculous off-topic questions you posted to this thread.

 

How many individual players are having a horrible game experience because of a GTN mistake?

 

That's your premise, yet I have little to no proof how accurate your premise is. You expect everyone to accept your premise without any form of proof. Surely you can see why that alone is cause for a certain amount of criticism?

 

Edit: And if anything my questions are providing free bumps to the top of the suggestion box where your idea is going to get more exposure. I can't guarantee support as a result, but I can say the original post will get more views from my attempts at a discussion (as one-sided as they may be).

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[Renarkis]

You asked what "pontification" means.

 

That's not...actually what I said. What I actually did was rather strongly imply that you were pontificating in your megapost. The one you ended with the giant links to the posting guidelines and whatnot (very impressive touch, by the way). I'm sorry about the confusion.

[branmakmuffin]

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

No, they are losing creds due to their own inattentiveness. That needs to be fixed ASAP.

 

An accident is something that happens beyond the control of the person to whom it happens. Like "a giant boulder fell off the mountain and crashed into my car." That's an accident. "I was following too closely and could not brake in time to avoid crashing into the car in front of me." That's not really an accident. Just as "I wasn't paying attention to the price of the stuff I was buying and I just clicked through (or disabled) the confirmation dialog telling me how much I was about to pay" is not an accident.

[anonnn]

No, they are losing creds due to their own inattentiveness. That needs to be fixed ASAP.

 

An accident is something that happens beyond the control of the person to whom it happens. Like "a giant boulder fell off the mountain and crashed into my car." That's an accident. "I was following too closely and could not brake in time to avoid crashing into the car in front of me." That's not really an accident. Just as "I wasn't paying attention to the price of the stuff I was buying and I just clicked through (or disabled) the confirmation dialog telling me how much I was about to pay" is not an accident.

 

That has already been said. Like I said, that's a non-solution and is a weak argument. Stop repeating old arguments and breaking the forums rules.

[azudelphi]

That has already been said. Like I said, that's a non-solution and is a weak argument. Stop repeating old arguments and breaking the forums rules.

 

Non-solution to a non-problem. Actually sounds quite fitting.

 

Unless, in regards to this topic, you are ready to elaborate on how you established your premise of this "problem"?

Edited January 28, 2015 by azudelphi

[XiamaraSimi]

That has already been said. Like I said, that's a non-solution and is a weak argument. Stop repeating old arguments and breaking the forums rules.

 

Im sorry but i still disagree to your mandatory un-removeable pop up. You want everyone to suffer because a few cannot/will not/refuse to use the tools already available to them.

 

Eyes

Reading skills/comprehension

Already existing pop up

Edited January 28, 2015 by XiamaraSimi

[branmakmuffin]

That has already been said. Like I said, that's a non-solution and is a weak argument. Stop repeating old arguments and breaking the forums rules.

Stop trolling and spamming. They are against forum rules.

 

You clearly don't like the answer, but the answer to your suggestion is that it's yet another solution is search of a problem. The problem you allege exists is in fact already addressed by existing in-game tools. At this point you are 1) tilting at windmills 2) ice skating uphill 3) spitting into the wind 4) spamming and 5) trolling.

[Rusah]

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.

 

Relevant passage bolded, underlined and changed to red. With this single statement op has made it clear beyond a doubt he is not interested in discussing this, thinks he owns this thread and expects everyone to bow down to him. Sanity has now officially left this thread and so will i.

 

I fail to see the point in trying to help mold this into a valid suggestion, when the OP has sunk his own idea beyond all hopes of salvage with his abhorrent behavior, ranting and foaming at the mouth, and actiing like a 8 year old throwing a tantrum, instead of discussing it like a rational human being. I'll still drop by but only to see how out of control this thing gets, not wasting any more of my time posting on sunk idea like this one.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Rusah

[Feargal]

OP thinks he is being trolled because someone disagrees with him. Can't argue with that kind of attitude.

[anonnn]

OP thinks he is being trolled because someone disagrees with him. Can't argue with that kind of attitude.

 

I explained multiple times and I'll explain again. Removing the delay or allowing the Purchase Confirmation to be entirely shut off just circumvents the protection mechanism. Which makes it only a marginal solution and the entire reason there's a problem NOW with players having (major) GTN accidents on a continuing basis. Bad design decisions were made in the initial GTN features, that's the reality.

 

There hasn't been a whole lot of genuine discussion about HOW to best protect players from this problem. In fact, it's just me and 1 recent poster. Given that this is the topic of the entire suggestion, it should be obvious to everyone that the rest of the posters are mostly trolls.

[Andrellma]

Well, since everyone who disagrees with the OP is a troll, and he won't even listen to any arguments that anyone is making except his own, I'll just come out and say it.

 

OP: Your idea is bad. Your inability to recognize this despite the fact that everyone has come out and told you so makes it pointless to continue to point out why it is bad, that has already been stated. Your idea has virtually no support from the community, and yet you still stand here and demand that BioWare implement rules to ensure that everyone is forced to endure what you, and you alone seem to think is right. You've got some nerve calling anyone else a troll with that attitude. When you post anything on the forums, you no longer own the thread, it becomes a discussion thread, open to the public, and where the public will voice their opinions. Their opinion on your idea has been voiced: it sucks. And your pinheaded insistence on calling everyone who disagrees with you a troll makes me question your own status as a troll.

 

I'm out.

 

/micdrop

[anonnn]

If you didn't have the courage to address the topic of protecting players from GTN accidents and to be on-topic without resorting to sniveling trolling to try to create the illusion of an argument, you should have never posted here in the first place.