a 200 mill PooooF

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by Noer
When you post the same arguments over and over again and again though it is pointed out to be wrong yes. You obviously dicuss just to discuss.

Funny even Cz says its an unfortunate matter, you just call her careless, moron and a lot of other stuff. So yes - trolls.

Haha! Pointed out by WHOM to be wrong?

I think it is sort of funny that we even have the corporation who is saying YOU are wrong. You post the same argument endlessly, however Miir, Kfox and I have posted several different angles to the subject.

However, you keep replying "you are wrong, go away troll." To me, that just ruins all the validity you once had in your posts.

The fact remains that if you bought a Music CD and accidently dropped it down the gutter for it never to be seen again, the place you bought it from should NOT and will NOT reimburse you.

If you accidently drop your item in game down the tube of your pets throat, you should NOT be reimbursed for it.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by Hollowpoint
Those saying that Claire is responsible for her actions, and that Funcom has no reason to replace anything, are correct. you win. Clair loses. Decency defeated. WOOT!!!!

Decency defeated? Nobody should be accountable for somebodies stupidity.

*squelch

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by kfox

They take responsiblity as much as they can, but there are certine things for which they just cannot be found at falut for...

Obviously the programing is at fault.

Why allow to trade with the pet?

What good can come of that? Explain to me how that is NOT a design flaw.

There is NO reson to have pets tradable. In EQ pets could at least use the weapons...why can pets trade in AO?

It IS the fault of the programmer.

Thats like having windows crash because the user tries to devide something by zero in calc.

Sure it's the users fault...but the job of the programer is to have protection for that.

It's called 'error capturing' you lear about it in CS 101.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by Paldorr
Anyone who so blatantly is trying to turn this thread (which is about Claire) into a thread about themselves and their arguments, is a troll in my book.

In your book?

Hehe, maybe you should read this over and over again and tell me how ironic it really is.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound


SO?

The point is that it is done NOW.
We are talking about NOW not 3 years ago.

And in 3 years, Funcom will implement this change.
It didn't take much to understand what he was saying.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



Decency defeated? Nobody should be accountable for somebodies stupidity.

*squelch

Stupididty doesn't exactly play a part in this. The trade window sucks. The trade window is tiny the trade window doesn't give any info.

Hell I've traded with the banker in EQ so many times that it makes me sick. I think I gave that bastard 10k of items and plat during the time I played EQ.

It's VERY hard to notice the difference between a trade with the pet and the player.

As in the code provides very little user feedback. Thats also CS101 material guys.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



And in 3 years, Funcom will implement this change.
It didn't take much to understand what he was saying.

My god are you stupid or does it just appear that way?

Funcom is NOT competing with the EQ from 3 years ago.

The competition is EQ as it is today.

The competitor gives lost items back.
The competitor has NPCs NOT accept items they don't need.

I'd like to see you run you company like that. "But your competitor has been doing this for 10 years!!!"
"Well in 10 years we'll do the same..."


At this rate, in 3 years AO won't exist.

[__________griemdaall]

Maybe FC shouldn't have put MK2 in the game in the first place, then Claire would have never had the opportunity to accidentally trade an obscene amount of credits to a pet. ;)

I'm just being silly, this isn't a flame.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound

Obviously the programing is at fault.

Why allow to trade with the pet?

What good can come of that? Explain to me how that is NOT a design flaw.

There is NO reson to have pets tradable. In EQ pets could at least use the weapons...why can pets trade in AO?

It IS the fault of the programmer.

Thats like having windows crash because the user tries to devide something by zero in calc.

Sure it's the users fault...but the job of the programer is to have protection for that.

It's called 'error capturing' you lear about it in CS 101.

Here is the difference. When calculating something by 0 in a calculator on your Desktop, in your scenario is will crash the desktop. An unintended feature.

The analogy isn't paralell to what happened here. Dividing by zero should be possible, and a crash is a consequence. What happened here was like asking Microsoft to reimburse somebody for the files they made for making the delete feature on your right-click menu too close to rename.

While it might be bad design to put delete in between create shortcut and rename, it is your own fault for accidently clicking it. It's nobodies responsibility. Now if firstly your screen didn't say "Trading with whoever" I would be singing a different toon. But it does and it takes effort to miss it.

The bottom line is this wont be reimbursed as it shouldnt be.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



Haha! Pointed out by WHOM to be wrong?

I think it is sort of funny that we even have the corporation who is saying YOU are wrong. You post the same argument endlessly, however Miir, Kfox and I have posted several different angles to the subject.

However, you keep replying "you are wrong, go away troll." To me, that just ruins all the validity you once had in your posts.

The fact remains that if you bought a Music CD and accidently dropped it down the gutter for it never to be seen again, the place you bought it from should NOT and will NOT reimburse you.

If you accidently drop your item in game down the tube of your pets throat, you should NOT be reimbursed for it.

Do not compare real life to the game.

If you get shot in the head in real life you don't come back to life.
You do in AO. It's not the same thing. Don't try.

AO is a program. It is a piece of software.

Any software should have some sort of error prevention system.

The interface is unclear. There is no feedback. There is no way to undo the error. There is NO reason for it to be like that.

More to the point. There is NO REASON for not giving back the item.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound


Stupididty doesn't exactly play a part in this. The trade window sucks. The trade window is tiny the trade window doesn't give any info.

Hell I've traded with the banker in EQ so many times that it makes me sick. I think I gave that bastard 10k of items and plat during the time I played EQ.

It's VERY hard to notice the difference between a trade with the pet and the player.

As in the code provides very little user feedback. Thats also CS101 material guys.

You can blame the window, or you could blame the person using it. I tend to blame the USER since, in this situation, the game didn't do anything the user didn't tell it to do.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



Here is the difference. When calculating something by 0 in a calculator on your Desktop, in your scenario is will crash the desktop. An unintended feature.

The analogy isn't paralell to what happened here. Dividing by zero should be possible, and a crash is a consequence. What happened here was like asking Microsoft to reimburse somebody for the files they made for making the delete feature on your right-click menu too close to rename.

While it might be bad design to put delete in between create shortcut and rename, it is your own fault for accidently clicking it. It's nobodies responsibility. Now if firstly your screen didn't say "Trading with whoever" I would be singing a different toon. But it does and it takes effort to miss it.

The bottom line is this wont be reimbursed as it shouldnt be.

Ctrl-Z

Undo.

Thats why it's there.

Because MS unlike FC knows that users make mistakes. Oh and "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DELETE THIS FILE!?" is feedback.

AO doesn't have that.

The pet doesn't say "Yo?! Dude?! Are you sure??!"

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



You can blame the window, or you could blame the person using it. I tend to blame the USER since, in this situation, the game didn't do anything the user didn't tell it to do.

Beep wrong.

The user WANTED to give the item to the PLAYER. Not the pet.

The game did NOT provide the player with a CLEAR message that the user was about to give the item to the PET.

Go take a class on interface design.

It's an obvious interface flaw.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound
My god are you stupid or does it just appear that way?

It appears you are. If AO and EQ were in any way shape or form similar, I would say it would be an easy task. But as of now, having NPCs take items is an unimplemented feature. In EQ, NPCs dont take items they don't need, however in AO NPCs dont need items.

I wasn't trying to justify what was said, I was explaining it. The 2 are dissimilar in every way shape or form.

They cannot be compared.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound



Do not compare real life to the game.

If you get shot in the head in real life you don't come back to life.
You do in AO. It's not the same thing. Don't try.

AO is a program. It is a piece of software.

Any software should have some sort of error prevention system.

The interface is unclear. There is no feedback. There is no way to undo the error. There is NO reason for it to be like that.

More to the point. There is NO REASON for not giving back the item.

There is a reason for not giving back an item. The same reason why dropping a Music CD down the gutter won't be reimbursed to you. It's your own fault. Deal with your mistake.

By the same logic, every single accidental deletion of any item in the game should be reimbursed by Funcom. No way. It's not going to happen. Not in a million years.

And by the way, don't you dare tell me not to compare real life. I happen to live in real life. There are differences between bad comparisons like your shot in the head one, and good ones that parallel situations so they can be clarified.

Everybody on this forum needs to stop with these a=b therefor c=d comparisons.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



It appears you are. If AO and EQ were in any way shape or form similar, I would say it would be an easy task. But as of now, having NPCs take items is an unimplemented feature. In EQ, NPCs dont take items they don't need, however in AO NPCs dont need items.

I wasn't trying to justify what was said, I was explaining it. The 2 are dissimilar in every way shape or form.

They cannot be compared.

Thats absurd.

They're the same game type.

An unimplemented feature is another name for a bug.

They CAN be compared. Thats why THEY ARE compared.
They're both MMORPGS, most people in AO have played EQ.
How are they dissimilar?

WHY EVEN HAVE PETS IN AO TAKE ITEMS?

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound


Ctrl-Z

Undo.

Thats why it's there.

Because MS unlike FC knows that users make mistakes. Oh and "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DELETE THIS FILE!?" is feedback.

AO doesn't have that.

The pet doesn't say "Yo?! Dude?! Are you sure??!"

Click your pet to open a trade
View in bright white letters "Trading with so and so"
Trade item anyway.


There is a reason Funcom made it so it told you who you are trading with.

[________FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Lucid Flow



There is a reason for not giving back an item. The same reason why dropping a Music CD down the gutter won't be reimbursed to you. It's your own fault. Deal with your mistake.

By the same logic, every single accidental deletion of any item in the game should be reimbursed by Funcom. No way. It's not going to happen. Not in a million years.

And by the way, don't you dare tell me not to compare real life. I happen to live in real life. There are differences between bad comparisons like your shot in the head one, and good ones that parallel situations so they can be clarified.

Everybody on this forum needs to stop with these a=b therefor c=d comparisons.

It's not an accidental deletion.

You get an "Are You Sure" message. That makes it pretty hard to 'accidently' delete an item.

Dropping a CD down the gutter is VERY different from a mistrade

Why didn't you bring up something like "Well if you jump of the 50th floor of a building by accident. God doesn't bring you back to life..."

You example is just as absurd.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by FileNotFound


Beep wrong.

The user WANTED to give the item to the PLAYER. Not the pet.

The game did NOT provide the player with a CLEAR message that the user was about to give the item to the PET.

Go take a class on interface design.

It's an obvious interface flaw.

What the user wanted and what the user did are two different things. In clear white letters it says "Trading with <whoever you trade with>" including pet names.

The user was not paying enough attention to read a clearly defined message stating who he was trading with.

That is a mental flaw, not a design flaw. If you want to ignore the very thing that will tell you what you are doing, that is your fault and you should live with the consequences.

[________________Miir]

Any software should have some sort of error prevention system.

Read my earlier comments about idiot-proofing.

The interface is unclear. There is no feedback. There is no way to undo the error. There is NO reason for it to be like that.


The interface IS clear.
That chat window clearly indicates the trading target the moment you initaite a trade.

There IS feedback.
The chat window gives text feedback indicating the trading target.

There IS a way to undo an error in a trade.
It's called the decline button.


If you choose to ignore those safeguards, you run the risk of losing items to a dishonest player or having a NPC eat your items.


Should Funcom put in multiple confirmation dialogs for every action you perform in game to avoid farces like this?

Are you sure you wish to zone into Pleasant Meadows?
Are you sure you wish to purchase 25 bullets?
Are you sure you wish to execute Divest Skills (Major) on that Leet?
Are you sure you wish to execute Tissue Repair on (player) xxxxx?
Are you sure you wish to initaite a trade with Slayerdroid?
Are you sure you wish to accept this trade with Slayerdroid?
Are you sure you wish to send this petition?
Are you sure you wish to send this vicinity chat message?


Cmon man.
People who play MMOGs aren't moronic little children who need their hands held for ever single action they do while playing the game.