123
edits
This belongs on the forums.
(→Agreed) |
(This belongs on the forums.) |
||
| (26 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
[[User:Houdin654jeff|Houdin654jeff]] 15:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC) | [[User:Houdin654jeff|Houdin654jeff]] 15:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
The only good thing is that once the desposit one pokemon that is never going to be traded, they can't continue to bug people with 100s others. The downside to that is people with legitimate trades can't do that many unless their house has Wi-Fi. | |||
Sadly, you know that soon enough that you will see hacked pokemon for sale on e-Bay. Buy it with PayPal then the seller will arange a time that they will drop it of at GTS asking for a common and 30 seconds later the buyer give the common and gets the pokemon they bought. | |||
But regulations should not be put into place. If someone wants to do something stupid. I say let them. No skin off my back. Just this evening I traded a Lv. 26 Manaphy for a Lv. 100 Mewtwo then turned around and traded a transferred Lv. 5 Charmander for a Lv. 1 Manaphy. | |||
NP Sage 23:59, 22 May 2007 (GMT) | |||
People DON'T have to have WI-FI in their houses. Your local McDonalds Has WI-FI as well (that's how I used The GTS) [[User:Gatogirl|Gatogirl]] | |||
Here's a trade I saw the other day that someone would have to be crazy to go through with: a level one magikarp, for a level 100 Deoxys. The sad part is that i see alot of these trades being competed on the gts website all the time :|--Kongu Chaos - I liek Mudkipz 22:50, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Biggest Oversight == | == Biggest Oversight == | ||
| Line 21: | Line 32: | ||
[[User:Lu-Tze|Lu-Tze]] 21:39, 21 May 2007 (GMT) | [[User:Lu-Tze|Lu-Tze]] 21:39, 21 May 2007 (GMT) | ||
== Disagree == | |||
I do not think that the GTS is flawed by its current system of requests. I received the following pokemon in exchange for fairly common "lesser" pokemon: | |||
Palkia level 100, Palkia level 50, Mew level 70, Groudon level 45. I have also traded a level 30 Swellow for a level 100 Blissey. | |||
By not coding restrictions into the GTS submission / request setup Nintendo allowed users to trade any pokemon for any other pokemon, which is a GOOD THING. If someone in an office somewhere decided what a level 30 Swellow was worth I can guarantee that I would not have been allowed to trade it for a level 100 Blissey. And I have no doubt that I would have never received a Mew. | |||
The problem is not that people can post a Jigglypuff and request a Mew. The problem is the search method is flawed. Users should be able to search by what they have and see other users who desire that pokemon. If that system of searching were possible I doubt that many would complain about the GTS. | |||
The problem is not that people can post a Rattatta and request a Mew. The problem is that people cannot search by what they have to find others willing to trade Mews and Groudons for what they have. The problem is not that people can post any pokemon and request any pokemon. The problem is that the search feature is flawed. | |||
[[User:_J_|_J_]] 12:32, 2@ May 2007 (EDT) | |||
They shouldn't make it impossible for people to offer certain ridiculous trades (like shinx (or any other common pokemon) for mew (or any other legendary/rare)) but they should for others (like asking for a lvl 9 or lower Tyranitar (or any other pokemon which is not possible to obtain on lvl 9 or lower without cheating)). It would also be good if there would be some way I don't have to only see ridiculous requests, in my oppinion the biggest flaw would probably be the limited amount of people who offer what you search you can see. | |||
== Method to the madness / greed... == | |||
This is the first pokemon game I've owned, and I love the concept of the GTS. I have a lasting memory, the first time I logged on and set a trade up and woke up the next morning to find that my trade had been accepted by a player in Kyoto, Japan. I thought that this was an amazing idea. But I also was astonished as time went on to see these horrible trades being posted. L15 Chingling for a L100 Mew. People asking for L9 Rapidashes. It's a waste. | |||
But recently, I was online looking for a faq on the underground, and I saw this... | |||
[http://faqs.ign.com/articles/786/786927p1.html Cloning FAQ] | |||
Much like in other pokegames, someone has supposedly figured out a way to cheat the game and dupe items and Pokemon by using the GTS. Basically, the duping only works if you KNOW your trade wont work at all. So, there's your answer. Unless Nintendo can monitor and block garbage trades, these guys will use a bug to slip past having to earn their items. | |||
--[[User:Trauma|Trauma]] 02:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Curious about hacked pokemon== | |||
Is there harm in receiving a hacked Pokemon? I know you're getting tricked, which sucks, but the article made me wonder whether or not getting one messes up your game. --[[User:Vash Aurion|Vash Aurion]] 21:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
==I Agree== | |||
I totally agree with your article, I'm trying to get a Chimchar (lv 1 is what I was looking for) and I got this: | |||
'''Lv. 50 and up Torterra''' | |||
'''Mesprit''' | |||
Another '''Mesprit''' | |||
'''Lv. 9 and under Claydol''' | |||
First off who is going to trade a lv. 50 Torterra for a Chimchar? In a sense this is like trading you Chimchar for an Infernape, which is completely unfair. | |||
Mesprit is very difficult to catch and no one would trade for such a low level pokemon. Lastly, Claydol evolves from Baltoy so there is not one at lv. 9 or under. | |||
--[[User:Luxray|Luxray]] 12:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
I got those options while looking for Chimchar too,but I also found some reasonable trades. i got a level four Lopunny in exchange for my Gabite (it said ANY level), A Stunky in exchange for a level 9 & under Muma (mine was lv. 7) & ANY Piplup for a Granbull( mine was level 1, freshly hatched). The only problem I encounterd is you can only search for pokemon you have seen before (so if you want a pokemon that you haven't seen you can't get it untill you do. This makes me mad because I wanted a female Sedot... [[User:Gatogirl|Gatogirl]] | |||
== Ideas for fixing == | |||
Okey, first off I'm just brainstorming ways to fix a half-broken system here. I don't expect that any of this would ever be implemented, as I don't think the programmers designed Pokemon D/P to be patchable an the client side... | |||
I've found that putting a pokemon up for offer works amazingly well (if you're making a reasonable request), but I've yet to find a viable trade in the search. For that matter, all I ever see in search are dupe-bug abusers (asking for impossible pokemon). First off, how to fix the dupe bug: | |||
* Validate the requested pokemon on the server-side. It wouldn't be too hard to deny "bad trades", especially since the only reason to request these in the first place is to guarantee your trade doesn't go through when abusing the dupe bug. The server could simply drop the user's connection in this case, forcing them to reconnect if they want to make a "real" trade. ''Note: This is the one fix I think <u>can</u> be implemented right now'' | |||
* Server should ensure that the previous transaction completed successfully on the client side. The client can't be trusted, so double-check on every new transaction that the last one was completed on the client side before accepting another. | |||
Now, my thoughts on making the search better. These assume that the "impossible" trades have been blocked on the server side | |||
* The biggest aide to search would be to provide results only for trades the player can fulfill. The client could send a simple list of what pokemon the player possesses. There's what, less than 512 pokemon currently? That's 64 bytes we'd have to send with every search, definitely not a bandwidth-intensive process. Server-side would filter the trades to only ones requesting a pokemon the player has. All results are sent back, and the client side filters out ones with levels the player doesn't hold. | |||
* 7 results? WTF? How useless would Google be if it only returned at most 7 results? That's a load of crap. | |||
* Cache the results on the client to speed up searching for more specific conditions after a generic search. | |||
* Searching needs better level filters. "10 and up" works fine for requests, but if the player wants a lv15ish pokemon they have no way to find only 10-19 levels... If I want a 15 do I care about the lv90 that's up there? I doubt it. | |||
Unfortunatly, I don't believe the D/P games can be patched from the server. I assume that if the card had extra EEPROM to store patches in, many of these issues would have been fixed by now. Bare minimum, I'd expect ''something'' to be done about the dupe bug. That would be a super high priority, user interface be damned! I hope that the designers learn from this pair of games and implement a much better GTS in the next games... and add some extra flash memory to those cards specifically designed for patching bugs that crop up after release. [[User:Tekkub|Tekkub]] 20:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
the results start at 3, then go to 5, then seven. they go back to 3 if you don't use the gts for a few days. Yes, it's completely stupid, and hopefully gets fixed in black and white--Kongu Chaos - I liek Mudkipz 00:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC) | |||
== I don't see it. == | |||
I see the exact opposite: | |||
Once I found a LVL 100 Giratina up for trade for a male Cascoon. | |||
Best Cascoon I ever spent!!! | |||
[[User:Mewtwo777|Mewtwo777]] 23:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC) | |||