Trade API Delays

Let's make a comparison, Chris.

Let's assume your largest player base is Country X (and for this discussion, suppose it's USA).

Suppose net neutrality wasn't in effect anymore, and ISPs could choose what traffic that was allowed on their network.

Assume that the largest ISPs were buddies with folks over at Blizzard, and because of that only allowed Diablo in their game genre, because... buddies.

---

Now, in this case discussed, you're the ISP. Ball's in your court.

"

thezensei wrote:

"

Hassefar60 wrote:

"

thezensei wrote:

... however - I would actually prefer an application over a website in some cases, such as a trading companion, Path of Building etc. ...

Disregarding the security issue, I understand. Open source is a minimum.

That should be up to the user, not Grinding Gear Games.

Indeed. It is up to the user since GGG cannot prevent you from downloading anything.

"

thezensei wrote:

net neutrality ... ISPs were buddies with folks over at Blizzard ... you're the ISP.

You're presuming that GGG bills the users every month in return for providing API access. ISPs charge for internet access, after all. In that case bandwidth and developer costs aren't a problem because the API actually makes a profit.

But, and I may be wrong, I didn't think that was the case. My understanding is that access to the API is free, and there's currently no real contract (except, as you point out, in the US, where clicking through the agreement makes you liable for criminal prosecution if you break it).

So what we have is Chris saying "we go to some effort to prove an API, because we think that makes our game better. But it's not working quite the way we want it to, so we're changing it".

I don't really have an opinion on the change, I kinda use some tools sometimes, but the "you have to grind to trade" thing annoys the sh!t out of me so I oscillate between SSF and grinding. But I don't enjoy grinding a badly balanced trading game (PoE trading is more like buying and selling trinkets on ebay than any of the fun economics simulation games).

"

Kimchacka wrote:

"

thezensei wrote:

net neutrality ... ISPs were buddies with folks over at Blizzard ... you're the ISP.

You're presuming that GGG bills the users every month in return for providing API access. ISPs charge for internet access, after all. In that case bandwidth and developer costs aren't a problem because the API actually makes a profit.

...

It was an analogy to highlight fairness and transparency, and that in the bigger picture, there might be unforeseen consequences (long-term).

At the end of the day, if Chris wants to favor a few developed projects, and reject whatever he sees fits, that is his right. Although my comments may sound somewhat sour, I mean well, and I hope you can see that.

I think I got my point across by now, and this will be the last comment for me on this subject.

"

Chris wrote:

Whitelisting
The community needs to decide who we're going to whitelist. So far we've been turning down small tools and private tools so that people can't use the data for private sniping. The theory is that a small unpopular tool can use the delayed data until it's substantially complete/useful and then with the community's support, can ask to be whitelisted.

But what about public tools that aim to be faster than the existing trade sites? No one (publicly) likes sniping, but everyone likes a better trade experience and faster data. What if the tool has to be run on your computer, encouraging people to install arbitrary executables? There are pros and cons to each that we need to discuss, because they have a large impact on the fairness of trade.

"Everyone likes a better trade experience and faster data"

Everyones also enjoy some stability.

I mean by that i'm not sure the largest part of PoE userbase want some more competition between tools and so on ( talking only about trading ).

Most of players just want to play, use one reliable tool that give them what they want, they arn't much concerned by saving two more seconds and will likely dislike having to change all weeks tools that can be used to achieve that.

This is why poe.trade is still the most used indexer even if there were more powerful options around, this is user-friendly and author has been here for years and is trusted by everyones. What else do we need ? Nothing.

Trading is (now?) a core aspect of PoE i don't think it's a good idea to allow everyone to jump in, allowing third party tools for years damaged the economy enough like that isn't it ?

For others tools that has nothing to do with trading could you setup a test environment to let authors show a sample of their tools to the community and then adding them to the whitelist if you are convinced it's beneficial for the game ?

In short: No more trading tools what we have is fine enough. And they still have a lot of place for improvements i think players that really want to improve trading would likely work toward with actual authors instead of starting something from scratch again.

"

Heli0nix wrote:

"

Chris wrote:

Whitelisting
Most of players just want to play, use one reliable tool that give them what they want, they arn't much concerned by saving two more seconds and will likely dislike having to change all weeks tools that can be used to achieve that.

Did you make a survey that proves this? It sounds like you're just making tings up, based on what suits you

"

thezensei wrote:

"

Heli0nix wrote:

"

Chris wrote:

Whitelisting
Most of players just want to play, use one reliable tool that give them what they want, they arn't much concerned by saving two more seconds and will likely dislike having to change all weeks tools that can be used to achieve that.

Did you make a survey that proves this? It sounds like you're just making tings up, based on what suits you

No and i don't feel the need to do it but if you insist i can do it :)

I eventualy have a good experience around third party tools and their issues in others games since i authored a few myself in the past.

"

Heli0nix wrote:

No and i don't feel the need to do it but if you insist i can do it :)

I eventualy have a good experience around third party tools and their issues in others games since i authored a few myself in the past.

Ok, so then we can establish you're not using facts, but make them up based on hunches from your personal experience. That's quite some misrepresentation right there.

"

thezensei wrote:

"

Heli0nix wrote:

No and i don't feel the need to do it but if you insist i can do it :)

I eventualy have a good experience around third party tools and their issues in others games since i authored a few myself in the past.

Ok, so then we can establish you're not using facts, but make them up based on hunches from your personal experience. That's quite some misrepresentation right there.

Did you make a survey to prove me wrong ? :^)

"

Heli0nix wrote:

"

thezensei wrote:

"

Heli0nix wrote:

No and i don't feel the need to do it but if you insist i can do it :)

I eventualy have a good experience around third party tools and their issues in others games since i authored a few myself in the past.

Ok, so then we can establish you're not using facts, but make them up based on hunches from your personal experience. That's quite some misrepresentation right there.

Did you make a survey to prove me wrong ? :^)

No, nor did I lie about knowing what majority of people want (and yeah, that's quite toxic behavior).