Rejected Sell items you get from chest back for half the bond/nugget value of the chest

Discussion in 'Development Discussions' started by zd3no, Jan 3, 2014.

Share This Page

?

Would you like this proposal implemented?

Poll closed Jan 17, 2014.
  1. Yes

    131 vote(s)
    75.3%
  2. No

    43 vote(s)
    24.7%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. zd3no

    zd3no Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    135
    There will be a two week period available to vote. (May be extended if needed.)

    If the idea wins 80% of the vote, it is sent to the developers who will respond with feedback and the idea will be linked in the ideas passed to developers.
    If it loses the vote by not attaining more than 79.99%, it will be moved to the archives. The idea will then be placed on the list of items to not post again.

    Original thread can be found <HERE>.


     
  2. ViriM

    ViriM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    29
    Should i spam this one or can someone explain me why he/she vote NO?
     
  3. yellowtoad24

    yellowtoad24 Guest

    hahahaha, I don't think people understand what the goal is of this. If they do understand what is getting voted about, then I also would love to hear why they voted this way. So please if you voted no I am just wondering as to why you voted this way. I am not here to judge. ;)
     
    Ripwise likes this.
  4. ViriM

    ViriM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    29
    Maybe we should explain them what the goal is :D and as our mate zd3no said Original thread can be found <HERE>.
     
  5. Logain Ablar

    Logain Ablar Guest

    Voted no.
    Just ensuring that all such items are auctionable on the market (which I think Da Twista mentioned they were probably going to do) is enough imho. Sure, it's only cash instead of bonds/nuggets, but it still allows you to (indirectly) trade the stuff you do not want for the stuff you do want.

    If something like the original idea is implemented, it would either require more work than you'ld initially think, or slightly "ugly" solutions like the intermediate keep-or-refund screen mentioned in the original thread (which, to work properly, would require an intermediate chest-state where the contents are already known, because you might have clicked open, seen what was inside, then had an error or lost connection while the intermediate screen was open but before you chose keep or refund).
    Imho if we're going for something like this idea, a cleaner and better solution would then simply be to go all the way, and assign nugget/bond sell values to certain "premium" items (just by item type, regardless of how they were acquired), and have a trader that offers the option to trade in that way.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 5, 2014
  6. RickTractorBolturd

    RickTractorBolturd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    52
    this is one that I had to vote no on as well. First, who wants to sell back a howdah, GT, or Inno belt for 750 nuggets regardless on if you already have them? and if you have those why are you still buying and being disappointed in premium chests when they are the reason people buy them? Those are just horrible examples and actually hurt the argument for this to be passed...
    But the reason I voted no, is because its been widely mentioned that there is a possibility the other items mentioned like D.O.I and BBQ tongs might become auctionable, making this just a waste of time for programmers to code. And to be honest, I don't really see them ever passing any measure that would refund in game currency used when their stance has always been you know what items are in the chests before you bought them. It sucks, I have gotten calamity jane's belt from premium a few times, but i didn't ask for a refund. I just stopped buying more. If you don't like the drops, then don't buy them.
     
  7. ViriM

    ViriM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    29
    Fact. But the idea you voted "No" *gave* you the right to choose if you would like to get it and trade it or not.
    You could have a deadline 10-20 sec to choose your option, then, if not, automatically you buy that item. Easy to explain.
    The good part is that you still believe in this idea.

    Maybe no one, would like to sell back them, but someone will think about it when he find a Golden Buffalo, Lincolin Hat etc. The point is someone to have the ability to choose whatever he decide.

    Programmers are being paid by Inno's company to follow the feedback of customers and develop this game in right way. But if you are a programmer and working for Inno, i understand it.
    The theme is to find a win-win solution for Inno and Customers. Not a one way direction to our or their actions.
     
  8. RickTractorBolturd

    RickTractorBolturd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    52
    The point is, this was your proposal and therefore your duty to convince players why this is needed, you did not do that for myself and clearly others. We are entitled to our opinions and just because they do not coincide with yours, doesn't make them wrong. The energy used would have been better spent reworking the idea. Something like maybe for 50 or 100 or 250 more nuggets or bonds you can toss your item back in and get a new random one and you can only do that once per chest purchased via the shop only. But your idea as it is, remains a no for me.

    Your original post outlined items like D.O.I. and BBQ tongs which are not auction-able at the moment, but we have been told possibly in the future they will be. So there is no need to submit an idea they are aware of, especially since the problem of multiples has just been created by an event over the last 2 weeks. Give them time to fix the issue. As for the other items, we would all love the best and exact item we need to drop, but part of a random chest means it might not. Referencing a "win win solution" means there is a problem, but no one forces you to buy chests, they are not mandatory, and further we are told what is in them to begin with so how can we complain? Everyone is aware of the risks and that the odds are against them. If you want to avoid the frustration of spending and not getting items you want/need then your next proposal should be to just offer the items in the shop for a set price. I've bought quite a few premium chests and hundreds of steel chests, after the last batch of items were added to them, I stopped. That is what players should do if they no longer like an item. As for the programmers, they are paid to program and LISTEN to feedback, not follow it when it is not in the best interest of the game-play or expanding the game. This idea is not about game mechanics or function or to fix a bug. Players are not lining up saying they are leaving because notes were added to premium chests. The proposal is to make players who choose to partake in an extracurricular part of the game happier. Which is great and if the chests were reworked myself and others would spend again but partial money back is not the answer. There are several posts throughout the forums of people complaining of the drops they got and saying some items should be removed from chests, the responses from various moderators are the answers to where Inno stands on a proposal like this. Feedback noted, but change is highly unlikely in this formtat
     
  9. *Anoop*

    *Anoop* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    44
    i opened a junk chest (50bonds), got a torn green pants. i already had 5 of them in my inventory. so i sell those 6 to the SHOP and 6*25 bonds.. :)
    how does you prevent this abuse? or how does the shopkeeper knew which was the pants i got from the chest?
     
  10. RickTractorBolturd

    RickTractorBolturd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    52
    exactly! the original post did include a work around to this problem with an accept or refund button, which was an add on from someone else's idea. think most would agree, we'd love to see a change, but this as it sits now is not the answer and really lacks thought to be effective.
     
  11. ViriM

    ViriM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    29
    Not Really. Better read what we discuss on Original Post when we already shared our thoughts of how this one could work.

    Understand and respect your vote. No time to argue on something we have different point of view.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2014
  12. zd3no

    zd3no Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    135
    The idea states that only new items can be traded for nuggets. If you have 6 torn pants in the inventory already you cannot trade them back. As soon as you chose to keep the item when you opened the chest, you are stuck with that item.

    We are all entitled to our votes, but like in a democracy, you need to understand what you are going to vote for, and just like a democracy, it doesn't work that way at all. We are either lazy to inform ourselves or going with the majority that have an influence on us (rumors, advertising, friends, personal gain and so on). You are maybe not one of "us" since you asked the right question, but I also hope you didn't vote before you got the answer :)
     
  13. *Anoop*

    *Anoop* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2013
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    44
    Then there will be one more alert box? we already have two already while opening a chest!
    I do not buy any chests! But i used to get some from the quests. So can I trade them for half the bonds as well? Currently we can't open a chest directly from a shop. It goes to inventory first. There we have to open it.
     
  14. zd3no

    zd3no Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    135
    The only difficulty I can see is that chests will need to remember how they were bought: bonds or nuggets. Therefore when you open the chest, you are presented with the item and 2 buttons: "Keep it" and "Exchange it for x nuggets/bonds". Depending on what currency was used to boy the chest, that currency will be offered to redeem if you do not want to keep the item.
     
  15. Thomas Ryker

    Thomas Ryker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    10
    personally, I don't think you have to even worry about that, only give the option of bonds back, makes it much more simple
     
  16. Zemelci

    Zemelci Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,743
    Likes Received:
    170
    Then people will complain about how they only get bonds back from chests they spent nuggets on.
     
  17. ViriM

    ViriM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    29
    Another great idea.. will be ko-ed.
     
  18. supraxus

    supraxus Guest

    I have to believe people are voting no out of spite or mean-spirit, or simple ignorance (like not reading the details). What on earth is there a negative opinion about this for?!? Have the chance to return something you bought that you don't want? I'd love to hear a cogent argument against this....

    Bah, it's better to thing people are stupid rather than mean...
     
  19. SmittyJohnson

    SmittyJohnson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    12
    Why in the world would someone vote no on this? Vote yes people!
     
  20. supraxus

    supraxus Guest

    Zd3no, this really is one of those obvious ideas. 'Would you rather be on fire or be cooking with fire?' Even if it doesn't get to 80%, can't it be submitted anyway. Sometimes democracy is NOT the way to go...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.