Leave trading alone, don't waste resources on it

"

The_Speculator wrote:

Goetzjam, your patience and time with some of these posters here is quite admirable, if they still can't see and understand by now, they will never understand that the current trading system really shouldn't be a priority for a small, indie co that currently and constantly has much bigger fish to fry.

Again, there is nothing so much that is wrong with the system... seperate yourelf's ability, willingness, and the economy from the system itself.

You guys act like GGG hasn't been talking about improving it for awhile now. Nothing wrong with fans holding them at their word.

"

goetzjam wrote:

Don't appreciate the cherry pick of statement, his problem is he can't sell items in standard, when he list his shop we can see why. I made a clear compassion of an item that sells in the leagues that doesn't sell in standard.

While you can take 1 phrase out of context and try to twist it it doesn't change the fact his issues are solely ECONOMIC BASED.

My issue is with a painful trade system that hasn't been improved upon in years although the developers have said that they would improve it. Simple as that.

"

BerMalBerIst1 wrote:

And nothing wrong with suggesting that it should rightfully still be on the back burner XD

It's been on the back burner for how long now? May as well say do nothing forever.

I honestly don't have the motivation to point out all the problems I have with those arguments, because it all boils down to the same point: We have fundamentally different views about what makes the game as good as it is currently, and what is needed to improve it. One of those things it needs is a trade system that doesn't suck.

ALL of the justifications for preserving the status quo so far have fallen far short of convincing, with only one point I actually agree with: Let them finish Act 4, and then work on the game's major issues. Of course, that comes with the notion that those issues should be the immediate next priority. If not, I don't think Act 4 will be as impactful as GGG is hoping. Lots of us are already one foot on either side of the fence, just waiting to see what they will do while letting them know what we expect and/or hope they will do.

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

ALL of the justifications for preserving the status quo so far have fallen far short of convincing

We just agreed the other day that the status quo doesn't need convincing, that the other side needs to fight for change.

Please someone tell me why GGG should take the money and time they could put towards act 5 into an AH which takes 2 3rd party sources and merges them to this website. How is this better than more real content?

Read the rest of the post (and the many, many before it), and I'll consider answering that question if you still don't know it.

So many of these types of threads boil down to people intractably arguing their own self-interest. It's basically 'I want content, screw changes to trade' vs 'if new content comes without changing the trade system, I'm done' (and endless variations thereof). For fun, change the word trade for desync or balance.

If anyone could look into a crystal ball and work out which change actually would bring/retain more players, I'm sure they would, but it's up to GGG to guess which will be more impactful. Moosifer - you can assert all you like that changing trade systems will be less impactful than putting in Act 5... But you're really just calling 'heads' vs 'tails' on a coin toss.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

So many of these types of threads boil down to people intractably arguing their own self-interest. It's basically 'I want content, screw changes to trade' vs 'if new content comes without changing the trade system, I'm done' (and endless variations thereof). For fun, change the word trade for desync or balance.

If anyone could look into a crystal ball and work out which change actually would bring/retain more players, I'm sure they would, but it's up to GGG to guess which will be more impactful. Moosifer - you can assert all you like that changing trade systems will be less impactful than putting in Act 5... But you're really just calling 'heads' vs 'tails' on a coin toss.

Overall like this assessment of the situation.

Again, want to point out that rex has said himself he doesn't use the forums to setup a shop for around a year and I am still waiting on srkyer to post his shop so we can assess his situation. Which every indication that we see is that his mediocre items aren't selling in standard and he thinks we can fix an economic issue with changing the trade system.

Crying that GGG hasn't done anything doesn't help anyone's point. Crying reliance on 3rd party tools doesn't help, these have vastly improved over the past year and people complaining haven't even tried them.

Even proposed solutions by people like @rex wouldn't replace the exsisting solution but offer limited ability to trade asyncronis ON THE FORUMS (which is a branch off the current system we use)

"

goetzjam wrote:

"

davidnn5 wrote:

So many of these types of threads boil down to people intractably arguing their own self-interest. It's basically 'I want content, screw changes to trade' vs 'if new content comes without changing the trade system, I'm done' (and endless variations thereof). For fun, change the word trade for desync or balance.

If anyone could look into a crystal ball and work out which change actually would bring/retain more players, I'm sure they would, but it's up to GGG to guess which will be more impactful. Moosifer - you can assert all you like that changing trade systems will be less impactful than putting in Act 5... But you're really just calling 'heads' vs 'tails' on a coin toss.

Overall like this assessment of the situation.

Again, want to point out that rex has said himself he doesn't use the forums to setup a shop for around a year and I am still waiting on srkyer to post his shop so we can assess his situation. Which every indication that we see is that his mediocre items aren't selling in standard and he thinks we can fix an economic issue with changing the trade system.

Crying that GGG hasn't done anything doesn't help anyone's point. Crying reliance on 3rd party tools doesn't help, these have vastly improved over the past year and people complaining haven't even tried them.

Even proposed solutions by people like @rex wouldn't replace the exsisting solution but offer limited ability to trade asyncronis ON THE FORUMS (which is a branch off the current system we use)

You really can't get it through your skull that no amount of "improvements" changes the fact that I fucking hate using 3rd party bullshit just to trade? Let me reiterate:

You know the system sucks because such tools exist--they were needed to compensate for how much it sucks.

My suggestion would require no 3rd party tools, no forums, no boards, no bullshit. Just trade in game.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

So many of these types of threads boil down to people intractably arguing their own self-interest. It's basically 'I want content, screw changes to trade' vs 'if new content comes without changing the trade system, I'm done' (and endless variations thereof). For fun, change the word trade for desync or balance.

If anyone could look into a crystal ball and work out which change actually would bring/retain more players, I'm sure they would, but it's up to GGG to guess which will be more impactful. Moosifer - you can assert all you like that changing trade systems will be less impactful than putting in Act 5... But you're really just calling 'heads' vs 'tails' on a coin toss.

If you think anyone does anything without at least some motivation of self-interest, you are quite naive, my friend.