[Resolved] ]Lost 5* Strange, No help in sight.

1356789

Comments

  • moss04
    moss04 Posts: 147 Tile Toppler
    edited December 2017
    For those making the argument that allowing restores would be be abused or would take so much effort as to distract from other work, there's a simple solution: charge 20 dollars for a roster restore.  If it happens so often that it actually costs resources, then this will allow it to pay for itself.  If it doesn't happen that often then at least the 20 dollar charge is enough to make people think twice about trying abuse the service or try to be more careful.  I'd feel bad about having to pay 20 dollars for an accident, but if I lost something that would literally take tens of thousands of dollars or thousands of hours to replace and was told to bugger off, I'd just quit.
  • MacEifer
    MacEifer Posts: 45 Just Dropped In
    carrion pigeons said:
    If they have good logging (likely) and competent coders (well...), then they could automate this process completely and eliminate both the CS burden and the begging.  World of Warcraft does it, I know.  Individual item restoration is not a big CS issue, or at least it doesn't need to be.  When you start talking about buying a 40-pack, I can see how things start to get complicated, but a single character shouldn't be difficult to restore completely automatically.


    Let's just say the question of whether the system is automated or not is secondary. The question is never if something can be done or not. The question is always if it should be done. From the deleted messages it is entirely clear that senior staff members have decided it should not be done.
    At the point where the user posted their messages on the company message boards the user has forfeited any and all goodwill anyone would likely work up in his favor.

    If something should be done, someone will work up the manhours and resources to make it work. The fact that they haven't means it's either not important enough or they decided against it. So no, automation is not the answer at this point and frankly, they already talked about that. Any CS task in anything but the worst company is always looked at and considered for automation. Just because something can be automated and done easy doesn't mean it should be done.

    It's like a gaggle of 13 year olds in here who think their parents should drive them to the cinema because they can drive them to the cinema.

    Being able to do something and doing something are two different things and you're discussing the merit of restoration not from its value but from its feasibility. This thread will go on for another 20 pages because you're asking the wrong questions and demanding the wrong things.
  • LifeofAgony
    LifeofAgony Posts: 690 Critical Contributor
    I’m discussing merit, not feasibility.  And will say again, there’s no pattern of behavior to explain why they’ve chosen to do these things for some, and not others.  And like it or not, the masses are aware of these exceptions.

    So what is the formula?  How do they arrive at the point of benevolence?  
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    DaBeast911 said:
    broll said:
    DaBeast911 said:
    @d90

    I sympathize with you and agree 100%. It takes no extra work to restore your 5 star, people have had it done before. I've seen entire rosters deleted on a video and then miraculously restored so restoring a character is a minor feat. It would be such a big deal if it is was a 3 star or heck even a 4 star but those 5 stars are extremely rare to come by and then to accidentally sell one is deflating. A year ago, restoring it wouldn't have been a problem, I sold a fully covered 266 Storm and had it restored, no problem. They simply looked at my roster the day before I sold it, saw it was there and replaced it. Heck, they even let me keep the ISO, which I was shocked by. I sympathize with you and hope that it works out.

    It's impossible that it "takes no extra work to restore your 5 star".  I don't know how much extra work it is, but the fact that someone needs to read a ticket and respond to it invalids your statement.  If it were no extra work it would be fully automated and require 0 human interaction.  I don't know how complex it would be to restore a 5* and neither do you.  I would guess it's not overly complicated, but again I don't truly know.  Let's say for the sake of argument it takes 10 minutes and CS can do it.  If they applied a policy of everyone can blanket undo a delete of any character and 1% of the players base takes advantage of this twice a year or more.  Let's suppose the game has 100,000 active players (I'm guessing i have no idea).  CS is now spending 10,000 minutes or 167 hours or 21 business days a year just supporting fixing peoples mistakes.  It's even worse if you consider it could take developer involvement and then you're taking 21 days of development time away from the game to support this for all players.

    The point is something small done a lot really adds up, a lot more than you'd initially think.  As a small company they have to make choices as far as what their CS resources can spend time doing.  They have to put barriers to the time spent on such things otherwise actual support issues and or development couldn't done (or they'd over hire, become non-profitable, and the game tanks).  

    I see more validity in the argument that they should support for all or support it for none. However since 100% of their revenue is micro transactions and most likely only a small percent spend a lot and an even smaller extent spend a ton they make exceptions for those players that spend enough that losing their business would hurt.

    All that to say you can spout all day how easy it is and they should just grant any request that comes buy, but at the end of the day they are a business with limited resources and they have to choose how to spend those resources effectively to keep the game running and profitable. To make a parallel let's say your roster was full of sentient characters.  If 1* Spider-Man makes a mistake that would cost you 1000 ISO to fix and there was a reasonable likelihood that more characters would make that same mistake, would you be willing to sacrifice your gameplay to accommodate them?  Even if 1* Spider-Man just deleted himself from your roster would that kill your gameplay?  Conversely if L500 Gambit made the same mistake for 1000 ISO it would probably be worth it to you to keep him from deleting itself.  These are the kinds of decisions Demi's management has to make to keep the game going.  For better or for worse.
    Seems like w e have a D3 employee on our hands. We are trying to help him and you wish to throw shade. Do me a favor, anything I comment on, just ignore, I'd appreciate it cause you're a real work of art.
    I don't work for D3 (who doesn't run CS btw) or Demi (who does).  I have worked in IT my entire career including both CS and management side.  I was just trying to help you and others understand how businesses work, because it seems clear that you don't.
    Edit:  Also look through my post history, I'm frequently critical of many things D3 and Demi do.  I'm not a fan boy of them and they annoy the tinykitty out of me, but IMO there's merit to not allowing CS to fix issues like this when they are user error/user carelessness.

    Thanks, but somehow I don't think they'd hang me in the Louvre  ;)  If I feel a response is appropriate to something you say I'll post it, it's fully within your power to block my replies though if you can't stand a reasoned response to your posts.
  • BoyWonder1914
    BoyWonder1914 Posts: 884 Critical Contributor
    MacEifer said:
    carrion pigeons said:
    If they have good logging (likely) and competent coders (well...), then they could automate this process completely and eliminate both the CS burden and the begging.  World of Warcraft does it, I know.  Individual item restoration is not a big CS issue, or at least it doesn't need to be.  When you start talking about buying a 40-pack, I can see how things start to get complicated, but a single character shouldn't be difficult to restore completely automatically.


    Let's just say the question of whether the system is automated or not is secondary. The question is never if something can be done or not. The question is always if it should be done. From the deleted messages it is entirely clear that senior staff members have decided it should not be done.
    At the point where the user posted their messages on the company message boards the user has forfeited any and all goodwill anyone would likely work up in his favor.

    If something should be done, someone will work up the manhours and resources to make it work. The fact that they haven't means it's either not important enough or they decided against it. So no, automation is not the answer at this point and frankly, they already talked about that. Any CS task in anything but the worst company is always looked at and considered for automation. Just because something can be automated and done easy doesn't mean it should be done.

    It's like a gaggle of 13 year olds in here who think their parents should drive them to the cinema because they can drive them to the cinema.

    Being able to do something and doing something are two different things and you're discussing the merit of restoration not from its value but from its feasibility. This thread will go on for another 20 pages because you're asking the wrong questions and demanding the wrong things.
    Condescension, the universal language of love of respect. By all means, since you're such an expert on this, what ARE the "right" questions and things to ask for? Since our knowledge of game programming is so inferior compared to yours, do please enlighten us on the correct way to go about this issue that has been given several different answers from several different reps, over several years. The responses in this thread should point out to you that there appears to be no real rhyme or reason to the way that they decide to solve this issue, so I'm not sure what your postulates about how Customer Service is supposed to work in theory is really adding to the attempt to find a solution here. Clearly their operating logic doesn't work the way that you claim it's "supposed" to. 

    The fact that people can cite specific examples of how this precise issue has been treated differently in multiple scenarios should look sketchy enough, in addition to the fact they don't want you showing other people the specifics of your customer service encounter. Its not your policy.......to reveal your policy? In what business world does that make sense, for your customers to not be entitled to transparency in regards to how your service is performed? 
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,965 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited January 2018
    DaBeast911 said:
    broll said:
    DaBeast911 said:
    @d90

    I sympathize with you and agree 100%. It takes no extra work to restore your 5 star, people have had it done before. I've seen entire rosters deleted on a video and then miraculously restored so restoring a character is a minor feat. It would be such a big deal if it is was a 3 star or heck even a 4 star but those 5 stars are extremely rare to come by and then to accidentally sell one is deflating. A year ago, restoring it wouldn't have been a problem, I sold a fully covered 266 Storm and had it restored, no problem. They simply looked at my roster the day before I sold it, saw it was there and replaced it. Heck, they even let me keep the ISO, which I was shocked by. I sympathize with you and hope that it works out.

    It's impossible that it "takes no extra work to restore your 5 star".  I don't know how much extra work it is, but the fact that someone needs to read a ticket and respond to it invalids your statement.  If it were no extra work it would be fully automated and require 0 human interaction.  I don't know how complex it would be to restore a 5* and neither do you.  I would guess it's not overly complicated, but again I don't truly know.  Let's say for the sake of argument it takes 10 minutes and CS can do it.  If they applied a policy of everyone can blanket undo a delete of any character and 1% of the players base takes advantage of this twice a year or more.  Let's suppose the game has 100,000 active players (I'm guessing i have no idea).  CS is now spending 10,000 minutes or 167 hours or 21 business days a year just supporting fixing peoples mistakes.  It's even worse if you consider it could take developer involvement and then you're taking 21 days of development time away from the game to support this for all players.

    The point is something small done a lot really adds up, a lot more than you'd initially think.  As a small company they have to make choices as far as what their CS resources can spend time doing.  They have to put barriers to the time spent on such things otherwise actual support issues and or development couldn't done (or they'd over hire, become non-profitable, and the game tanks).  

    I see more validity in the argument that they should support for all or support it for none. However since 100% of their revenue is micro transactions and most likely only a small percent spend a lot and an even smaller extent spend a ton they make exceptions for those players that spend enough that losing their business would hurt.

    All that to say you can spout all day how easy it is and they should just grant any request that comes buy, but at the end of the day they are a business with limited resources and they have to choose how to spend those resources effectively to keep the game running and profitable. To make a parallel let's say your roster was full of sentient characters.  If 1* Spider-Man makes a mistake that would cost you 1000 ISO to fix and there was a reasonable likelihood that more characters would make that same mistake, would you be willing to sacrifice your gameplay to accommodate them?  Even if 1* Spider-Man just deleted himself from your roster would that kill your gameplay?  Conversely if L500 Gambit made the same mistake for 1000 ISO it would probably be worth it to you to keep him from deleting itself.  These are the kinds of decisions Demi's management has to make to keep the game going.  For better or for worse.
    We are trying to help him and you wish to throw shade. Do me a favor, anything I comment on, just ignore, 
    I hate this. Whenever someone has a dissenting opinion they must work for D3. Way to use emotion rather than reason to completely invalidate his post. I just want to say that I appreciate Mac, Broll and the other devils advocates here as this is a forum... a place to discuss rather than to cast aspersions on anyone who doesn’t agree with our point of view. I especially appreciate the point of view of someone who knows the inner workings of customer service. 

    Back to the topic at hand...

    Two things jump out to me.

    1- I agree it makes sense from a company standpoint to cater to the whales and make more exceptions for them. I won’t argue that point. I just wish that the rules were clearer. I agree that whether you deliberately sold a character or it was accidental, the consequence should be the same. The rules should be the rules, but the fact is that they are not... not for everyone. The “unwritten whale rules” need to be either spelled out for all of us so we are all aware of the real consequences of our actions (intended or not) or they need to stop making exceptions for the rich, simple as that. This game has serious integrity issues and is getting a bad rep from the player base due to these uneven applications of the rules. I think this is an important point that should not be overlooked. 

    2- This game needs a lock feature badly. We should be able to lock our toons to prevent any selling/deletion. I think this would be a great feature that would help prevent some of these mishaps. 

    As an aside I almost made an accidental 20 dollar HP purchase last night. Fell asleep playing, dropped my phone and when I picked it up it was on then confirm purchase screen. Luckily I had to input my thumbprint to confirm any purchases as that’s just how my iPhone  is set up. Too bad we couldn’t implement that level of security for selling characters!
  • Pants1000
    Pants1000 Posts: 484 Mover and Shaker
    CS has rules about what they can and can’t do.  For decent spenders they will make one-time exceptions to bend the rules.  For whales they make more exceptions.

    In this case, the user is a decent spender but he already used up his one-time exception.

    This is pretty normal for any CS department.  

    I’m a nearly FTP player and I’m fine with this, even though it means I don’t get any exceptions.  A while back I got a yellow OML from the daily resupply I couldn’t use because mine was 1/5/5.  I asked CS for a one-time exception to swap it, and they refused.  It stinks, but oh well.  
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    Pants1000 said:
    CS has rules about what they can and can’t do.  For decent spenders they will make one-time exceptions to bend the rules.  For whales they make more exceptions.

    In this case, the user is a decent spender but he already used up his one-time exception.

    This is pretty normal for any CS department.  

    I’m a nearly FTP player and I’m fine with this, even though it means I don’t get any exceptions.  A while back I got a yellow OML from the daily resupply I couldn’t use because mine was 1/5/5.  I asked CS for a one-time exception to swap it, and they refused.  It stinks, but oh well.  
    While I understand the 1 time exceptions this is a level 453 5*.  This isn't 1 cover. This could be make or break for somebody in this game?   Is that what it should come to?  
  • Yepyep
    Yepyep Posts: 954 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2017
    fight4thedream said:
    **Mod Mode: ON**

    While I do sympathize with d90's situation, posting private messages either from the forum or emails from CS is a violation of rule 7. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you.

    **Mod Mode: OFF**

    On a more personal note, I hope you are able to get your 5* Strange back. 
    @fight4thedream -- Well handled.
  • LifeofAgony
    LifeofAgony Posts: 690 Critical Contributor
    Pants1000 said:
    CS has rules about what they can and can’t do.  For decent spenders they will make one-time exceptions to bend the rules.  For whales they make more exceptions.

    In this case, the user is a decent spender but he already used up his one-time exception.

    This is pretty normal for any CS department.  

    I’m a nearly FTP player and I’m fine with this, even though it means I don’t get any exceptions.  A while back I got a yellow OML from the daily resupply I couldn’t use because mine was 1/5/5.  I asked CS for a one-time exception to swap it, and they refused.  It stinks, but oh well.  
    This is all supposition.  You have no facts to back up this claim other than the anecdotal evidence.  There are spenders who have been denied and F2P who have been approved.

    If this was true, then simply publish the data that states “if you’ve spent x, you will receive y”.

    They won’t because there is no actual guidelines in place.  Just bolilerplate that they use when it suits them, and the boilerplate is for both approving and denying requests.  I can tell you based on my own experiences, I have been denied many times over for things people who have spent far less have received.  

  • carrion_pigeons
    carrion_pigeons Posts: 942 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2017
    MacEifer said:
    carrion pigeons said:
    If they have good logging (likely) and competent coders (well...), then they could automate this process completely and eliminate both the CS burden and the begging.  World of Warcraft does it, I know.  Individual item restoration is not a big CS issue, or at least it doesn't need to be.  When you start talking about buying a 40-pack, I can see how things start to get complicated, but a single character shouldn't be difficult to restore completely automatically.


    Being able to do something and doing something are two different things and you're discussing the merit of restoration not from its value but from its feasibility. This thread will go on for another 20 pages because you're asking the wrong questions and demanding the wrong things.
    You're right that I made the assumption that it would be in everyone's interest to resolve a situation like this via restoration, if it costs Demi nothing to do it.  I based that assumption on my experience with other, well-managed games, and also on my understanding of human nature, which suggests to me that inspiring people to quit the game, rather than doing something that costs nothing, is not a generally good business strategy.

    I'm not particularly clear on what part of my assumption falls down in the current situation, but whatever it turns out to be, I'm pretty sure that finding out wouldn't satisfy me.  If I were to find out their precise reasoning, I probably wouldn't go, "Oh, well, that makes perfect sense then.  By this analysis, keeping this customer happy is simply not worth the zero dollars it would cost to do so."  That's not to say that I can't think of reasoning that leads to that sort of conclusion, but rather that I can't think of any that doesn't make me want to puke on the head of the person who would have made such a decision.
  • Pants1000
    Pants1000 Posts: 484 Mover and Shaker
    The rockett said:
    Pants1000 said:
    CS has rules about what they can and can’t do.  For decent spenders they will make one-time exceptions to bend the rules.  For whales they make more exceptions.

    In this case, the user is a decent spender but he already used up his one-time exception.

    This is pretty normal for any CS department.  

    I’m a nearly FTP player and I’m fine with this, even though it means I don’t get any exceptions.  A while back I got a yellow OML from the daily resupply I couldn’t use because mine was 1/5/5.  I asked CS for a one-time exception to swap it, and they refused.  It stinks, but oh well.  
    While I understand the 1 time exceptions this is a level 453 5*.  This isn't 1 cover. This could be make or break for somebody in this game?   Is that what it should come to?  
    I’d be fine with CS making an exception here. I understand losing one of your best 5’s would be terrible.  

    I’m not arguing he shouldn’t get help from CS, just that CS does have rules and guidelines.  
  • Beer40
    Beer40 Posts: 826 Critical Contributor
    I've read this whole thread from start to now and have changed my mind several times over the course of it. The best thing I can offer is something for everyone to think about:

    What if Brigby came on here and said that everyone who believed the player should receive his 453 Strange back would also receive a 453 Strange and those who were opposed would receive nothing, in the spirit of what they advocated for? And that anyone who wished to change their opinion still had the right to do so. How many opinions change then?

    Think about that. Do unto others...
  • Harpuia
    Harpuia Posts: 3 Just Dropped In
    Beer40 said:
    What if Brigby came on here and said that everyone who believed the player should receive his 453 Strange back would also receive a 453 Strange and those who were opposed would receive nothing, in the spirit of what they advocated for? And that anyone who wished to change their opinion still had the right to do so. How many opinions change then?
    What if Brigby came on here and said that everyone who believed the player would have to wait months before their support ticket would be answered to, including cover swaps, in the spirit of what they advocated for?
  • Ducky
    Ducky Posts: 2,255 Community Moderator
    DaBeast911 said:
    fight4thedream said:
    **Mod Mode: ON**

    While I do sympathize with d90's situation, posting private messages either from the forum or emails from CS is a violation of rule 7. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you.

    **Mod Mode: OFF**

    On a more personal note, I hope you are able to get your 5* Strange back. 
    Rule 7 says:

    7. Treat your fellow users kindly. We will not tolerate any of the following;
    • Trolling, or posting something just to get a rise out of someone.
    • Flaming, or insulting / bashing / harassing another user.
    • Posting offensive material. This includes anything that could be considered racially, religiously, or sexually demeaning or insulting. Posting a link to material of this nature is equally forbidden.
    • Offensive or profane forum user names.
    • Posting threatening material of any kind.
    • Referencing specific player names, for instance, in order to question in-game actions, or accuse of cheating (this includes nicknames and acronyms)
      • Congratulation posts [and the mentioning of other players] are permitted as long as they are done in a sincere and respectful manner. However, in the event that the player being mentioned is not comfortable with the post, they have the right to request the post or their name be removed. Please contact a moderator with your request.
    • Acting like a jerk.
    • Posting content from private messages

    There is nothing regarding posting an email between yourself and customer service. The rules need to be amended to include emails if that's what's to be interpreted.
    That's because he techincally broke rules 7 and 8. If you had read the rules, the next rule states:

    8. We reserve the right to delete any material that we deem inappropriate for our forums, including, but not limited to:
    • Offensive topics
    • Offensive profile avatars
    • Advocating cheating
    • Hack links
    • Insulting others
    • Spoilers
    • Data-mined or misleading information
    • Customer Support ticket conversations
    • Etc.
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    Beer40 said:
    I've read this whole thread from start to now and have changed my mind several times over the course of it. The best thing I can offer is something for everyone to think about:

    What if Brigby came on here and said that everyone who believed the player should receive his 453 Strange back would also receive a 453 Strange and those who were opposed would receive nothing, in the spirit of what they advocated for? And that anyone who wished to change their opinion still had the right to do so. How many opinions change then?

    Think about that. Do unto others...
    That's not do unto others though.  If I messed up and delete a character I'd probably open up CS ticket about, but if they said no I wouldn't waste any more of their time or mine because of my mistake.  TBH I the only reason I'd even open a ticket in the first place is because there is precedent for them doing it, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.

    Giving someone free stuff because they supported one side of an argument has nothing to do with anything....
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    Crnch73 said:
    There’s an old saying I used to have at my old job: sometimes, you get yelled at for playing in the sandbox. Sometimes you get yelled at for playing outside the sandbox. The problem is, you never know what the rules of the day are until you actually get yelled at, and then it’s too late. 

    All this is to say... I feel for the OP, but the huge problem here is that no one knows the true rules of CS, because there aren’t any. Unless you’re a huge whale, we don’t know where our payments truly lie on the hierarchy, so we don’t know if they will throw us a bone or not. I understand keeping the whales happy is very important, but would it anger those same whales THAT much if a non-whale were allowed to restore a 5 star champion, sold accidentally? We need to get a set of rules that applies to everyone and publish those rules. There will always be a few people who will be “above the law”, but those should be so few and far between that the masses don’t even know about it. Post a video to YouTube of you deleting your account, then get it restored? You pulled back the curtain when you shouldn’t have and maybe you lose preferential treatment. We are just living in anarchy
    I agree with this, but we have a set of rules about cheating.  They always stick to those......or maybe not.  

    Just sucks that the only way for this guy to try and get a resolution Is to come here.  That's sad.  
  • Beer40
    Beer40 Posts: 826 Critical Contributor
    broll said:
    Beer40 said:
    I've read this whole thread from start to now and have changed my mind several times over the course of it. The best thing I can offer is something for everyone to think about:

    What if Brigby came on here and said that everyone who believed the player should receive his 453 Strange back would also receive a 453 Strange and those who were opposed would receive nothing, in the spirit of what they advocated for? And that anyone who wished to change their opinion still had the right to do so. How many opinions change then?

    Think about that. Do unto others...
    That's not do unto others though.  If I messed up and delete a character I'd probably open up CS ticket about, but if they said no I wouldn't waste any more of their time or mine because of my mistake.  TBH I the only reason I'd even open a ticket in the first place is because there is precedent for them doing it, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.

    Giving someone free stuff because they supported one side of an argument has nothing to do with anything....
    On the first part I put in bold, I'll simply say I don't believe you, but that's just my opinion because I don't know you.

    On the second part, it has everything to do with the subject. What would you want CS to do if you were in that situation? Give you the 453 5* back. The people advocating for him to get his toon back could simply be putting themselves in his shoes. They are already doing unto others...

    The people advocating against have their reasons also (and aren't necessarily wrong, that's not what I'm trying to say here) but if they were to get a large benefit from advocating this case, would they change their opinion? My guess is yes. Each and every one. So instead of fighting this, and possibly needing something of their own to feel this is "done right", why not just join in and say, "Hey you know what? Its not about me (this time) but if I were in this players shoes, I hope everyone would band together and try to help me". That is "paying it forward", "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and just being a good community member in general.

    It seems simple enough to me, but since I've had to post that message and now defend it, I'm guessing its not as easy to understand as I thought.

Categories