First Wave of Trade Improvements
" I'm sorry but I don't quite understand what you're saying. I do understand how third party sources are free but I would love to see you become as big as GGG are currently. They can't just pay for servers & run the game out of their own pockets. I mean common, there always chances for you do get premium stash tabs when they're on sale or not, they don't really cost much. I do have some knowledge over what pay-to-win is but not greatly, I'll admit it. However, I don't see how any of this can be pay-to-win when nothing previous has been removed, you can still use third-party sources to make trades with normal or premium stash tabs. - Iniquitous_ "You are a miracle, beloved. You are also a masochist and possibly an idiot. But you're my idiot." - Oni-Goroshi
- Iniquitous_ |
|
" This. |
|
|
I just don't understand why someone who bought 5 premium stash tabs will have the advantage of in-game trading system while I (who bought 20 regular tabs)won't? Can someone explain that to me? Is his money better than mine or what?
|
|
" I would say soon. It all depends how wide new system will be adopted by the community. If 90% of listings done via new system then it's just a matter of time when Xyz decides that it's not worth his time to support old system (even though right now he will support it). ExileTools already dropped support for old system, so all tools that use it as backend will only work with new system (e.g. poeprice.info). Even so it's totally unnecessary restriction. This is better for community and for GGG for everyone to have access to new system, because old one is terrible. If they want to restrict it so the data feed isn't huge - why not just restrict amount of public tabs per account. Let's say 1 tab per account for the first phase and increase with time if it doesn't cause any problems. (By that I mean that any tab can be made public - regular or premium, but you can't have more than N tabs set to public at the same time). Last edited by DemonikPath#1311 on Mar 1, 2016, 1:09:52 PM
|
|
" Short answer, yes, his money is better than yours. Long answer, lets wait for someone with 4-6 supporter tags to show up and call you an entitled crybaby for wanting features to be universal instead of being behind a paywall. | |
" This is by far one of the best comments I've seen. Others need to read this & I to support where you are coming from. - Iniquitous_ "You are a miracle, beloved. You are also a masochist and possibly an idiot. But you're my idiot." - Oni-Goroshi
- Iniquitous_ |
|
" So far Garfunkel the response from GGG is the sound of silence. I really want to hear GGG response, and I think they should give it soon |
|
" i'm curious too. they just seems to ignore that, or just go with "upgrade is cheap". |
|
|
There is also something that I'm not sure people have thought of yet. While I use Aquisition and the on/offline link I have control of WHEN I wish to trade. This new system will make me appear online all the time, so even when I am mapping and do not wish to trade I will have no choice but to appear to be trading.
This leaves 2 options. Either /dnd which then leaves a hell of a lot of people who appear to be trading but are not, or. I will have to go through each tab each time and remove them from public view to map. This mean I will likely to be offering less tabs for sale so I can have some control of when I trade. This will actually be pretty intrusive as there is no way 'as yet' to appear offline while mapping. The result of this. There will be less trading from those with multiple tabs as they will likely not list most of them due to the intrusive nature of trade during mapping. The alternate of /dnd will make it so that they can't communicate with anyone at all. Result. people are now more likely to not trade in smaller ticket items and keep the tabs down to a minimum so they can manage them much easier. Overall a bad thing for those of us with a lot of tabs, it will make tab management a royal nightmare if you even try use them all for trading. While I like this concept on the whole, it will only work and be useful if there is some way to appear offline to avoid the mass /dnd people will run into. |
|
" I may not have bought as much as some people, but I still spent more on PoE than on any other game. The main reason for that isn't even that the game is so awesome (and it is), but the studio's stance on transactions. I know that stash tabs are a bit of a grey area, but generally the majority of purchasable items are cosmetic. I never felt like I was nudged towards the cash shop by the game, but rather treated as a respected player no matter what I did or didn't do with my money. It felt like donating to a great studio and getting a sweet MTX was just a nice "thank you!" as added bonus. I feel like that is utterly outstanding and the gold standard I'd wish every developer would adopt, hence I gladly spent a little more money on this game than I might have otherwise. Considering that, I think it should be fairly easy to see how turning a basic gameplay element into a paid feature does invite at least some scepticism. But hey, according to this thread, if I have concerns I must be a pathetic, entitled little kid who never spent a dime on this game and should just quit whining and get a job already. Just to address the next "argument": all my stash tabs are premium. That is besides the point. Things don't magically become acceptable, just because I personally benefit from them. Seriously, get some fucking empathy. " So let me get this straight, say a company releases a buggy game and modders make an unofficial patch. Now it's totally fine for the company to charge for patches, since no one's forcing me to buy them and I can just keep on using the unofficial patch? Because this is pretty close to the situation at hand. People wanted better trading, because the de facto system was shit. The mere existence and importance of those 3rd party tools are proof, that the systems in place for trading are just not good enough and show why people have been asking for a better system for quite a while. And now that we might see a better system for some people, the old system all off a sudden is totally fine and acceptable, because it offered that functionality all along with 3rd party software. I'm sorry, but that is madness. " The funny thing about that term is that it almost always shows up as a term that's used to deflect pay2win accusations and its definition is so all encompassing that it is factually useless. You can find the most ridiculous pay2win stuff being defended as pay2convenience, because you can technically get it by grinding for 2 years. I'm not even exaggerating, that is how people who are passionate about their game of choice defend pretty much anything about it. Curiously enough, that never enters the discussion when it comes to cosmetic items. Food for thought. But in the end, you can call it what you want, it's gameplay functionality behind a paywall and no amount of sugar coating will change that. It's up to the individual to decide if that is inherently bad, but some people have supported GGG the way they did because GGG has tried their best to stay away from stuff like that. That's the main issue here, but sure, "entitled kids want everything for free!" works as a retort just as well, I guess. Now it's awesome that GGG are doing something about trading. And they're calling it a first wave, we should probably keep that in mind and treat this as a preview more than anything else. And as that it is awesome. Maybe that functionality will be available to everyone in the future, even those disgusting leeches who bought several supporter packs and never spent points on premium tabs. I personally hope so, because this is something that should be in the game as basic functionality and it is a bit exciting to see how the devs are going to implement it. However, the concern that in-game trading might stay a premium exclusive is a valid one and it would be nice if the people arguing against those concerns would do so without the ad hominems and the utterly ridiculous arguments that would border on insanity in any other context. Please stop strawmanning the frankly laughable notion into your replies, that everyone not extatic about these news clearly must never have supported GGG in a monetary fashion. Please don't imply that the masses should be grateful to still use 3rd party tools, as if that was in fact anything more than a bandaid for the issue. Really, you're better than that. I hope so, at least. Of course, since I know how these things work, that's never going to happen, so let me go ahead and save you the effort: " " " " |
|






































































