Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mod_Maven

10.19.2011 Our policy on selling digital cards

Recommended Posts

Mod_Maven

TPCi does not allow players to sell digital cards for the TCG Online. In order to play, all players must agree to the terms of use. The language in the terms of use that deals with sales of digital goods is as follows:

 

In no event may you trade any virtual in-game items for "real" money, any other good or service outside of TCGO, or any promise to provide certain products or services whether in-game or outside the game. Any attempt to trade outside TCGO or trade a prohibited item may result in your account being suspended or terminated.

 

But why? There are several reasons for this decision, and "the lawyers" (who really are lovely people-unless they are overworked, which they are. A lot.) have advised us to disallow sales for very good reasons. The first is:

 

FRAUD: People can suck. It's a sad but true reality online today. People can advertise digital cards and after you pay, you never get the cards traded to you. What villainy is this? What can you do? Well, not a whole heck of a lot. TCG Online is not responsible for fraud in this area. TCG Online expressly forbids the buying and selling of digital cards. It's very upsetting to get conned and more so when there is no recourse.

 

FUTURE PLANS: In November 2011 the TCG Online will introduce Gems into the store. This allows the user to purchase gems, which can be used to get Avatar Items and in-game accessories. That is pretty cool in itself but after that, we will introduce Gem Trading. Ahhhh, you say. Now you get it. Trading gems to get the cards you want in a safe and fraud protected setting within the TCG Online game? SCORE!

 

So there you have it. Two very good reasons for disallowing the purchase of digital cards, that will, in the long run, make everyone happier. In a Beta, features launch as they are ready, not necessarily when we think they should and this is a great example of timing. Soon, everyone will be able to solicit trades for what they want legally.

 

Thanks!

 

Prof_Maven

Edited by Prof_Mathis
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhiteDragon64

Love the idea, couple of questions though.

 

1) When you allow for people to buy or sell their cards for gems, will you be giving players any guidelines as to how many gems a card is worth, or will it be down to the comminuty to decide what each card will be worth?

 

 

 

2) Have you planned out how players will obtain gems? If so, when will we find this out? (As I'm assuming if you wanted us to know now, you would've told us)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mew Jadester

Can I turn gem into cash?

 

 

 

I know one player would ask....Cauz he have like 100+ candies and such, redeemed like 5000+ codes AND he expects to get money back by profitting it...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Animatt4

I HIGHLY doubt that would ever happen mew. I think the whole reason they're implemented would be to avoid real money transactions between players, doing that would just make pokemon the middle man for players for real cash actions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aisor

This is some good stuff. Great work! =)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
infinity_master

 

Love the idea, couple of questions though.

 

 

 

1) When you allow for people to buy or sell their cards for gems, will you be giving players any guidelines as to how many gems a card is worth, or will it be down to the comminuty to decide what each card will be worth?

 

 

 

 

Hey WhiteDragon64, I like your first question and would like to see a "Prof" answering it, including when will we be able to buy cards for online play using gems??

 

The reason I'm asking this is that it states above: "In November 2011 the TCG Online will introduce Gems into the store. This allows the user to purchase gems, which can be used to get Avatar Items and in-game accessories", so does that include digital cards for online play as well ??!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slheggypff

Yeah I've already seen virtual cards being sold on Ebay..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
infinity_master

 

Yeah I've already seen virtual cards being sold on Ebay..

 

 

No, you didn't understand me....... I know that Ebay sells Pokemon TCG Theme decks, but the problem is that you have to buy real cards, wait until the your order is received (which for me takes a month !!!) and then play with that deck online. I would like to see Pokemon TCG Website sell vitual cards only for online play only (which logically should be for a cheaper price). Benefits include:

 

1. You buy the "cards or boosters" you want directly from this website and do not have to buy a whole theme deck that may contain cards that you do not want.

 

2. You receive those cards directly after payment (which means that I do not have to wait for a whole month).

 

3. In my country, we do not have people who play this game (not popular game in my country), so I do not want to buy real cards and dump them just to get the code for online play (which is a waste), so buying "virtual" instead of "real" cards is more suitable for me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhiteDragon64

I've pretty much got the same problem as you, in that no-one I know plays the Pokemon TCG, so the boosters I buy sit in a drawer once I've used the code card.

 

But slheggypff is not wrong, there are actually sellers on Ebay who are selling cards for the TCGO, which is something the gems system would help to get rid of. I imagine they would organise a trade online to give you the cards you bought in exchange for, like, an energy card or something.

 

It's hardly a system I would put any faith in, anyway, considering the many tales of scams involving Pokemon and Ebay.

 

 

 

 

 

As for staying on topic, if you do decide to set benchmarks for the prices on individual cards, please make that kind of information freely available when trading. If you set up a trade, or see a trade offer, it should show how many gems each side is worth, so you can determine for yourself if something is a fair trade or not right then and there.

 

It may also deter people from putting up "worthless trash" for "the most expensive card around" like we see so often on Public Trades these days.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nessie123

 

FUTURE PLANS

: In November 2011 the TCG Online will introduce Gems into the store. This allows the user to purchase gems, which can be used to get Avatar Items and in-game accessories. That is pretty cool in itself but after that, we will introduce Gem Trading. Ahhhh, you say. Now you get it. Trading gems to get the cards you want in a safe and fraud protected setting within the TCG Online game?

I don't completely understand how gems work. What do we purchase gems with? Real money? You say they can be used to get Avatar items and in-game accessories, and then say you can trade gems to get the cards you want, so does that mean we can trade gems for virtual cards?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pookaveli

Just to be clear, the reason you are not allowing virtual cards to be sold is because there is the potential for sellers to be dishonest? If that is the case, most websites like eBay and Paypal - methods almost all sellers use - have buyer protection, which refunds the buyers in the case of fraud and punishes dishonest sellers. I don't mean to be critical or anything like that; I'm just trying to understand the decision when a similar online card game in Magic: The Gathering has allowed people to sell virtual cards for years with no ramifications. Even though I'm sure this issue has been discussed a lot before the decision was made, I am curious to know the reasoning behind it. I know a few people had invested into PTCGO heavily because there were no clear signs saying that it would not be legal until now. Are those individuals out of luck now? Thanks for filling me in, and I'm looking forward to what Pokemon TCG Online can do for the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
inchy5000

The gem system is simply a business model that is meant to put money back in the pocket of Pokemon rather than a seller on a secondary market. It is being passed off as some sort of benefit to users, but the one who actually benefits is Pokemon. With the gem system, instead of purchasing singles from a seller on eBay (a transaction in which Pokemon makes no profit outside of the initial purchase of the booster that yielded the singles), users must now purchase gems from Pokemon in order to trade for singles. Pokemon thus profits when the booster is first purchased, and then it profits again when the gems are purchased to trade for the cards in the booster. This is the primary reason for not allowing users to sell singles - Pokemon profits more by essentially "doing it themselves."

 

 

 

 

 

I don't have a problem with Pokemon making money, obviously, but my issue is when it is to the detriment of the user. By regulating the secondary market like this, Pokemon is contraining the number of sellers available and shrinking the market. If a buyer wants singles, he will have to purchase gems from Pokemon with the hope that he can trade the gems for singles. But if I am a "seller," what is my incentive to accept gems, particularly if I do not need any additional singles myself? Let's face it, sellers are not going to trade for gems just so they can be redeemed for clothing for an avatar or other "in-game accessories." Additionally, why would gems automatically replace the current "currency," i.e. boosters (which, by the way, are sold on a secondary market - Troll and Toad and many others have made plenty money selling them). As a seller, why do I want gems instead?

 

 

 

 

 

The issue ultimately lies in the fact that a gem is not a dollar. It isn't liquid like cash. Why in the world would someone willing to part with singles accept gems? The result is a demand not being met because Pokemon would rather the cash flow back to them than into a secondary market.

 

 

 

 

 

On another note, I would also like to point out that nowhere in the terms of use does the language Prof_Maven has quoted appear. It also does not currently appear in the terms of use users agree to when registering, and never has. I understand the terms are subject to change at any time without notice, but it would be nice to have the actual terms themselves updated. However, I am sure both new and current users appreciate the effort to point out the change here in the forum. Unfortunately, this does not provide any relief for those who have already invested in the PTCGO with the belief that trading PTCGO singles for PTCG singles would be possible (frankly, a reasonable assumption given the ambiguity in the terms as they pertain to trading). I am certain it was foreseeable to Pokemon that users might invest in the PTCGO with the aim to either trade and sell singles, and it is likely Pokemon has even witnessed users acting in accordance with that aim. It's disappointing Pokemon allowed its users to invest so heavily before announcing a response to an issue that was completely foreseeable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
infinity_master

 

Just to be clear, the reason you are not allowing virtual cards to be sold is because there is the potential for sellers to be dishonest? If that is the case, most websites like eBay and Paypal - methods almost all sellers use - have buyer protection, which refunds the buyers in the case of fraud and punishes dishonest sellers. I don't mean to be critical or anything like that; I'm just trying to understand the decision when a similar online card game in Magic: The Gathering has allowed people to sell virtual cards for years with no ramifications. Even though I'm sure this issue has been discussed a lot before the decision was made, I am curious to know the reasoning behind it. I know a few people had invested into PTCGO heavily because there were no clear signs saying that it would not be legal until now. Are those individuals out of luck now? Thanks for filling me in, and I'm looking forward to what Pokemon TCG Online can do for the game.

 

 

Individuals cannot sell their virtual cards here (it is ilegal), we wil have the chance to buy virtual cards directly from this website itself legally (through TCGO Shop) through converting real money into gems and using them to buy those cards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nessie123

 

 

Just to be clear, the reason you are not allowing virtual cards to be sold is because there is the potential for sellers to be dishonest? If that is the case, most websites like eBay and Paypal - methods almost all sellers use - have buyer protection, which refunds the buyers in the case of fraud and punishes dishonest sellers. I don't mean to be critical or anything like that; I'm just trying to understand the decision when a similar online card game in Magic: The Gathering has allowed people to sell virtual cards for years with no ramifications. Even though I'm sure this issue has been discussed a lot before the decision was made, I am curious to know the reasoning behind it. I know a few people had invested into PTCGO heavily because there were no clear signs saying that it would not be legal until now. Are those individuals out of luck now? Thanks for filling me in, and I'm looking forward to what Pokemon TCG Online can do for the game.

 

 

Individuals cannot sell their virtual cards here (it is ilegal), we wil have the chance to buy virtual cards directly from this website itself legally (through TCGO Shop) through converting real money into gems and using them to buy those cards.

 

Pookaveli already knows that. He and others are just questioning the reasoning behind this decision.

 

BTW nice post inchy5000.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mod_Snow

chill pills!! cool_smile.png (I'm sorry i had to use it at one point or another) Let's go![/b]

 

 

 

 

Love the idea, couple of questions though.

 

1) When you allow for people to buy or sell their cards for gems, will you be giving players any guidelines as to how many gems a card is worth, or will it be down to the comminuty to decide what each card will be worth?

 

2) Have you planned out how players will obtain gems? If so, when will we find this out? (As I'm assuming if you wanted us to know now, you would've told us)

 

 

 

 

1) For the most part, secondary markets are determined by the players. We can't necessarily put a mandatory value on individual cards that all of you will be marketing to each other. It's definitely not an official answer, but I will give you the fact that it's less than likely.

 

 

 

EDIT: I went and got an official answer for this. Just to be clear, Pokemon in no way, shape or form has anything to do with evaluating/pricing/valuing the secondary market.

 

 

 

 

 

2) I'm not sure what you mean by this. Gems will be purchasable, with money, if that's what you're asking. If you're wondering which purchasing methods will be available (such as PayPal and otherwise) they have been planned out but not announced. You'll probably find out once the gems go active ;)

 

 

 

 

 

Can I turn gem into cash?

 

I know one player would ask....Cauz he have like 100+ candies and such, redeemed like 5000+ codes AND he expects to get money back by profitting it...

 

 

 

 

I'm going to have to give a solid "Nope" on this one. This is meant to create a safer way to make these individual exhanges. Being allowed to convert this back to cash would only encourage some of the fraudulent dangers that we are trying to prevent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Love the idea, couple of questions though.

 

1) When you allow for people to buy or sell their cards for gems, will you be giving players any guidelines as to how many gems a card is worth, or will it be down to the comminuty to decide what each card will be worth?

 

 

Hey WhiteDragon64, I like your first question and would like to see a "Prof" answering it, including when will we be able to buy cards for online play using gems??

 

The reason I'm asking this is that it states above: "In November 2011 the TCG Online will introduce Gems into the store. This allows the user to purchase gems, which can be used to get Avatar Items and in-game accessories", so does that include digital cards for online play as well ??!

 

 

 

 

We have not revealed what "accessories" entails, so you'll just have to stay tuned for that ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've pretty much got the same problem as you, in that no-one I know plays the Pokemon TCG, so the boosters I buy sit in a drawer once I've used the code card.

 

But slheggypff is not wrong, there are actually sellers on Ebay who are selling cards for the TCGO, which is something the gems system would help to get rid of. I imagine they would organise a trade online to give you the cards you bought in exchange for, like, an energy card or something.

 

It's hardly a system I would put any faith in, anyway, considering the many tales of scams involving Pokemon and Ebay.

 

 

 

As for staying on topic, if you do decide to set benchmarks for the prices on individual cards, please make that kind of information freely available when trading. If you set up a trade, or see a trade offer, it should show how many gems each side is worth, so you can determine for yourself if something is ****** trade or not right then and there.

 

It may also deter people from putting up "worthless trash" for "the most expensive card around" like we see so often on Public Trades these days.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the suggestions! I'll be sure to note this in case we do wish to review our gem features. We'll still have measures in place for our younger users that will only allow them to trade like-for-like, though I don't imagine that younger players will be able to trade gems right away if at all. This will (hopefully) help prevent scamming.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FUTURE PLANS

 

: In November 2011 the TCG Online will introduce Gems into the store. This allows the user to purchase gems, which can be used to get Avatar Items and in-game accessories. That is pretty cool in itself but after that, we will introduce Gem Trading. Ahhhh, you say. Now you get it. Trading gems to get the cards you want in a safe and fraud protected setting within the TCG Online game?

I don't completely understand how gems work. What do we purchase gems with? Real money? You say they can be used to get Avatar items and in-game accessories, and then say you can trade gems to get the cards you want, so does that mean we can trade gems for virtual cards?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes it's suggested that you can purchase gems with money, though specific purchasing methods have not yet been revealed. At this time, when we say that you can trade gems for cards, we only mean amongst each other. There are NO current plans to start exhanging single cards for gems through the TCG Online shop. That would cause more conspiracy! D:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just to be clear, the reason you are not allowing virtual cards to be sold is because there is the potential for sellers to be dishonest? If that is the case, most websites like eBay and Paypal - methods almost all sellers use - have buyer protection, which refunds the buyers in the case of fraud and punishes dishonest sellers. I don't mean to be critical or anything like that; I'm just trying to understand the decision when a similar online card game in Magic: The Gathering has allowed people to sell virtual cards for years with no ramifications. Even though I'm sure this issue has been discussed a lot before the decision was made, I am curious to know the reasoning behind it. I know a few people had invested into PTCGO heavily because there were no clear signs saying that it would not be legal until now. Are those individuals out of luck now? Thanks for filling me in, and I'm looking forward to what Pokemon TCG Online can do for the game.

 

 

 

 

Aha! But you see, even though some auctioning websites might have measures against fraudulent acts, these players are still committing the act within our happy TCG Online environment! (They have to deliver the card after all). So if something happens to a card, or a player gets scammed, they can only tell us about the issue regarding the scamming player, but we cannot take any action regarding any missing items (should they be agreed upon in the exchange), even if the auction website manages to reimburse them, or vice versa (the player trades away the card after receiving the payment, only to have the payment bounce, etc.). There are so many things that can go wrong, so we want to keep everything in one environment so that we can monitor the exchanges and keep our players safe ^_^ I hope that clears up some of the reasoning!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The gem system is simply a business model that is meant to put money back in the pocket of Pokemon rather than a seller on a secondary market. It is being passed off as some sort of benefit to users, but the one who actually benefits is Pokemon. With the gem system, instead of purchasing singles from a seller on eBay (a transaction in which Pokemon makes no profit outside of the initial purchase of the booster that yielded the singles), users must now purchase gems from Pokemon in order to trade for singles. Pokemon thus profits when the booster is first purchased, and then it profits again when the gems are purchased to trade for the cards in the booster. This is the primary reason for not allowing users to sell singles - Pokemon profits more by essentially "doing it themselves."

 

I don't have a problem with Pokemon making money, obviously, but my issue is when it is to the detriment of the user. By regulating the secondary market like this, Pokemon is contraining the number of sellers available and shrinking the market. If a buyer wants singles, he will have to purchase gems from Pokemon with the hope that he can trade the gems for singles. But if I am a "seller," what is my incentive to accept gems, particularly if I do not need any additional singles myself? Let's face it, sellers are not going to trade for gems just so they can be redeemed for clothing for an avatar or other "in-game accessories." Additionally, why would gems automatically replace the current "currency," i.e. boosters (which, by the way, are sold on a secondary market - Troll and Toad and many others have made plenty money selling them). As a seller, why do I want gems instead?

 

The issue ultimately lies in the fact that a gem is not a dollar. It isn't liquid like cash. Why in the world would someone willing to part with singles accept gems? The result is a demand not being met because Pokemon would rather the cash flow back to them than into a secondary market.

 

On another note, I would also like to point out that nowhere in the terms of use does the language Prof_Maven has quoted appear. It also does not currently appear in the terms of use users agree to when registering, and never has. I understand the terms are subject to change at any time without notice, but it would be nice to have the actual terms themselves updated. However, I am sure both new and current users appreciate the effort to point out the change here in the forum. Unfortunately, this does not provide any relief for those who have already invested in the PTCGO with the belief that trading PTCGO singles for PTCG singles would be possible (frankly, a reasonable assumption given the ambiguity in the terms as they pertain to trading). I am certain it was foreseeable to Pokemon that users might invest in the PTCGO with the aim to either trade and sell singles, and it is likely Pokemon has even witnessed users acting in accordance with that aim. It's disappointing Pokemon allowed its users to invest so heavily before announcing a response to an issue that was completely foreseeable.

 

 

 

 

I understand why some players may have had issues with this, but it also has to be taken into the development perspective.

 

 

 

As you said, the main problem you see with this trading system is that players who were aiming to benefit off of the cards don't see the value in gems. However, I believe that this is jumping the gun in a number of ways and relates to more than one aspect of your statement. Who is to say that once the full game is released that gems won't have the value that our singles exchangers are looking for or were aiming for in the first place? Of course if the goal was to simply provide a profit for one's own benefit, this isn't allowed anyways, despite what auctioning sites can get away with regarding other online TCGs.

 

 

 

It also relates to the investment argument. This is a beta, and there were no promises that all things were set in stone. While we don't anticipate another DB wipe, what if we ended up doing one? That would result in a lot of disappointed auction customers who would have lost their money. Therefore, any investment into a beta product for the purpose of redistribution of singles or profit is at the user's own risk, and is one of the reasons why we needed to bring this issue forward now.

 

 

 

As for Prof. Maven's quote, I believe that she was simplifying this statement, which has always been in the EULA:

 

 

 

 

 

You will not: (a) reproduce, distribute, disclose or create derivative works based on the contents of TCGO, or any part thereof; (B) decompose, disassemble or reverse engineer TCGO, or any part thereof, or otherwise use TCGO to develop functionally similar products or services; © modify, alter or delete any of the copyright, trademark, or other proprietary notices in or on TCGO; (d) use TCGO for the benefit of any third party, including without limitation, in an outsourcing, service bureau or timesharing arrangement; pr (e) avoid, circumvent or disable any security or digital rights management device, procedure, protocol or mechanism in TCGO.

 

 

 

Also remember that the EULA binds the user to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy on Pokemon.com as well as the TCGO. There are multiple statements there as well regarding the use of Pokemon's intellectual property. That's all! It's much nicer to have a version that everyone can understand instead of posting all of the legal mumbo jumbo ^_^. I'm sure that it will be edited sometime soon to better clarify our current policies regarding this whole issue.

 

 

 

 

 

Phew! I hope that clears up some questions! Please understand that I am in no way trying to debate with anyone or cause any arguments, I am just providing as many answers as I can (please don't yell at me! ;_;)

 

 

 

Until next time, stay cool!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prof. Snow

 

Parasol Lady

 

 

Need to report a bug or an issue? Submit a ticket to support.pokemon.com!

 

"I'm like a hunter of peace. One who chases the elusive mayfly of love... or something like that."

 

- Vash the Stampede

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
inchy5000
I understand why some players may have had issues with this, but it also has to be taken into the development perspective.

 

 

As you said, the main problem you see with this trading system is that players who were aiming to benefit off of the cards don't see the value in gems. However, I believe that this is jumping the gun in a number of ways and relates to more than one aspect of your statement. Who is to say that once the full game is released that gems won't have the value that our singles exchangers are looking for or were aiming for in the first place? Of course if the goal was to simply provide a profit for one's own benefit, this isn't allowed anyways, despite what auctioning sites can get away with regarding other online TCGs.

 

 

 

It also relates to the investment argument. This is a beta, and there were no promises that all things were set in stone. While we don't anticipate another DB wipe, what if we ended up doing one? That would result in a lot of disappointed auction customers who would have lost their money. Therefore, any investment into a beta product for the purpose of redistribution of singles or profit is at the user's own risk, and is one of the reasons why we needed to bring this issue forward now.

 

 

 

As for Prof. Maven's quote, I believe that she was simplifying this statement, which has always been in the EULA:

 

 

 

 

 

You will not: (a) reproduce, distribute, disclose or create derivative works based on the contents of TCGO, or any part thereof; (B) decompose, disassemble or reverse engineer TCGO, or any part thereof, or otherwise use TCGO to develop functionally similar products or services; © modify, alter or delete any of the copyright, trademark, or other proprietary notices in or on TCGO; (d) use TCGO for the benefit of any third party, including without limitation, in an outsourcing, service bureau or timesharing arrangement; pr (e) avoid, circumvent or disable any security or digital rights management device, procedure, protocol or mechanism in TCGO.

 

 

 

Also remember that the EULA binds the user to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy on Pokemon.com as well as the TCGO. There are multiple statements there as well regarding the use of Pokemon's intellectual property. That's all! It's much nicer to have a version that everyone can understand instead of posting all of the legal mumbo jumbo ^_^. I'm sure that it will be edited sometime soon to better clarify our current policies regarding this whole issue.

 

 

 

 

 

Phew! I hope that clears up some questions! Please understand that I am in no way trying to debate with anyone or cause any arguments, I am just providing as many answers as I can (please don't yell at me! ;_;)

 

 

 

Until next time, stay cool!

 

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to respond, myself and I am sure plenty others appreciate it. Although I am still a bit unclear as to how the section of the terms you have provided could reasonably be interpreted as forbidding the trade of PTCGO singles for PTCG singles (perhaps section (a), although such an interpretation of section (a) would seem to include trading PTCGO at all, which we know is within the terms), I concede that Pokemon has the right to alter its terms at any time without notice. I appreciate the effort to address the concern, though. My point is really just that once PTCGO codes/boosters/singles became valuable due to the popularity of the game, Pokemon must have foreseen users would attempt to buy/sell single cards on a secondary market. Yet, there was really no effort - until now - to explicitly warn users that such a practice was against the terms of use. Given how ambiguous the terms are, I think this would have been an appropriate action months ago. I understand an investment would have been and still is a risk, generally speaking. Yes, most users understand this is beta and there is a chance there could be a wipe. However, this a known, obvious risk and some investors may choose to move forward with the investment regardless. What was not explicitly made known to be a risk was that users would not be able to sell or even trade boosters/singles once redeemed. Had this additional risk been made explicit, I am sure users would have factored into the decision as to whether or not to proceed with a large investment. Like I said, I am sure users appreciate Pokemon bringing the issue forward now, but the time to do so was once it knew users may invest, not after.

 

 

 

 

Well, unless Starbucks starts accepting "gems" in exchange for a Cafe Mocha, I don't see how the gems will have the value that single exchangers are looking for or were aiming for in the first place. What use are the gems to a single exchanger when they can only be used to a) trade for more cards, or B) purchase in-game accessories (I'm imagining items like custom coins) and avatar clothing? If a single exchanger really wanted to trade for more cards, he or she would trade for the actual cards if possible, not gems which could then be used to trade with another user. In the end, I don't know how the gems will be implemented and so it is difficult to predict how users will react. I am simply offering what it is my best hypothesis, and I am doing so in an effort to hopefully make the PTCGO better. On its face, it seems there may be some issues with implenting "gems" as a form of currency, and I just want to point that out. I'm not an economist and I'm sure a lot of very smart people have put a lot of time in developing the PTCGO, and so for whatever it may be worth I am just expressing some concerns. Thank you again for taking the time to respond. Likewise, I am not looking for an argument - hopefully it does not appear that way! I think it is great the moderators are so responsive here, and so it's nice to take the opportunity to have a discussion and clear things up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SanguineYeti

While I can see and appreciate the effort behind developing the precautions put in place by these anti-real life sales credences, I believe it will ultimately harm the game. By limiting the free/secondary market possibilities, the games potential is so too limited.

 

P.S. Loved professor snow's opening catch phrase.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the_chad

I do not agree with many of these policies. In particular, you are potentially damaging the future of this product by not allowing selling of digital cards. Not allowing the swapping of digital and in-real-life cards is also absurd, in my opinion.

 

When a person is purchasing a booster pack at Target, or where ever they are buying it from, they receive random cards and a TCG online code. You are saying that they can't sell the digital cards for which they paid for by buying that booster pack. Yes, it is an online booster pack, but you are telling someone they can't sell a product for which they paid for themselves.

 

There is literally no difference between me buying a booster pack and selling the cards in it than opening an online booster pack and selling the cards in it. Is there not a market for this game? I would hope there is and will be!

 

I would hope that the game designers and those in charge are aware that the most successful TCG of all time, Magic: The Gathering has a great online program and market. They allow the purchasing and distribution of digital cards. And before anyone brings up the argument that this game may be orientated towards kids, that is not really even a valid argument. Do kids buy packs? Not generally. Their parents do. People should be able to do what they want with the product they are purchasing.

 

Please, realize the huge mistakes you are making and change your policies, immediately.

 

- Chad (TCG player for 12 years)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBattlez89

One thing I have a huge problem is the fact that sites such as professoroak.com and troll and toad were selling codes which are what is used to get cards in the first place. I don't know if Pokemon has any type of agreement with these sites but if they dont then the idea of them selling code cards individually causing buyers to not have to buy the packs themselves would cost Pokemon money. In this case we are buying packs and code cards making Pokemon a ton of money and thus what we do with the cards after should be our business. How can trading online cards for real life cards possibly be regulated? There are so many questions that aren't being answered and I think thats a little ridiculous.

 

 

 

Also I think pretty much everyone knows by now a certain person was treated very poorly by Pokemon for trading outside beta. That player is a great guy in the community and very well respected. I just hope Pokemon realizes they risk alienating alot of the player base by the way they treated him. I will say in closing that PTCGO had aot of potential, but with all of the controversy thats started already if alot of people were turned off from it I wouldn't be surprised. That certain person is a great ambassador for the game and could have been an asset in making the game bigger but I think Pokemon went the wrong route on that one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JasonKlaczynski

A disappointing day for Pokemon TCG Online. A game with unlimited potential is again hindered by antiquated terms & conditions. I think it's worth pointing out the OP brings up two "reasons" why we cannot buy/trade cards, but only one of these is actually a "reason" (and a terrible one, at that):

 

1) Because people can scam.

 

This is 2011. Internet sales are part of everyday life. Buyer protection is offered by all credible third party hosts, such as eBay and Paypal.

 

 

 

2) Because gems will eventually be tradable for cards.

 

This isn't a reason to disallow sales of PTCGO cards. In fact, it's not even a bad reason. This is simply irrelevant. Who cares if you can trade gems for cards? Avatar items are the biggest flop I've seen in my life. No one thinks that is cool, not even children. (Try trading a Leipard hat for a good card and let me know how many times you are successful.)

 

 

 

In closing, I'd like to say that preventing sales is bad enough as it is very difficult to enforce, but trying to tell people they cannot trade their online Pokemon TRADING CARDS for real Pokemon TRADING CARDS is absurd. People have certain expectations when they are paying money for cards. PTCGO seems to be overstepping its boundaries.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dec0y

I for one fully support the updated policy. Why should we care if Pokemon gets the profit? Don't we want them to have the money to fund more of the games we all enjoy? I know that it's not exactly a struggling company but it's much like the music industry to me.

 

I hate that there's so much sharing of music, without giving the artist what they earned (your money in support of their music). I can understand creating a unique market that encourages the purchase of music in different forms (i.e iTunes and Amazon offering individual tracks as an alternative to buying the entire album). I don't like that the artists aren't really getting their fair share of the profits this way, in favor of fans getting a "discount" on their tunes. I try to always purchase cd's from the artist website, a concert, or a store that is more generous to the musicians (like a specialty music store).

 

Similarly, I think that Pokemon is creating games that we enjoy, and shouldn't have to beg us to pay them for the service. It's not our Right to play these games, but Pokemon has offered them to us at a price that they believe is reasonable. If you don't like the prices just wait and eventually the games will grow old and lose value, and you can pay the lower prices then, or you can invest a little more now and be thankful that they've delivered something for you that you didn't have before.

 

I guess it's all just about the community and time that I was raised in. I was taught to be thankful, not to be selfish and ungrateful. Someone offers you a meal, you shouldn't insult them for not giving you enough, or for asking you to wash you plate when you're done.

 

Long story, short. I like the change and am glad that it makes it possible for me to get ahold of cards/packs/decks that I couldn't otherwise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JC_Denton46

Yeah I really don't see how you can just ban people from selling they themselves purchased in the first place

 

You don't see WalMart managers showing up to garage sells and stopping people from selling things they bought from their store

 

The bigger points have been addressed already I feel by the other guys before me, and well put as well

 

This really is an absurd rule, and I fail to see why it's being inforced other than thinking it will lose you guys money

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChaosJim

Forgive me for not using the quote notation.

 

Snow says, "Of course if the goal was to simply provide a profit for one's own benefit, this isn't allowed anyways, despite what auctioning sites can get away with regarding other online TCGs."

 

I feel this is very charged language that goes against the nature of a healthy discussion. It seems to imply that eBay is getting away with something because people can sell Magic or WoW cards on it. At one point, eBay didn't allow sales of digital items from what I understand, they've grown beyond that. As far as "for one's own benefit," I generally purchase products and services for my own benefit. Maybe my enjoyment for the product itself, maybe some personal gains, and in some occasions I luck out and get to do both.

 

Regarding section (a) of the EULA, it is simply too vague about a topic which it needs to be specific about. As it reads now, it seems that my inability to "distribute" pieces of PTCGO would include handing a code card to one of the kids who comes to my league. I hope this also isn't included in the list of punishable offenses, because it simply doesn't make sense.

 

Snow also replies to one of Pooka's comments by saying, "Aha! But you see, even though some auctioning websites might have measures against fraudulent acts, these players are still committing the act within our happy TCG Online environment! (They have to deliver the card after all). So if something happens to a card, or a player gets scammed, they can only tell us about the issue regarding the scamming player, but we cannot take any action regarding any missing items (should they be agreed upon in the exchange), even if the auction website manages to reimburse them, or vice versa (the player trades away the card after receiving the payment, only to have the payment bounce, etc.). There are so many things that can go wrong, so we want to keep everything in one environment so that we can monitor the exchanges and keep our players safe ^_^ I hope that clears up some of the reasoning!"

 

I think I should start by saying I appreciate the need to keep players safe. Really though, it seems like the people who would be participating in buying singles through eBay etc are in fact adults, who need less of a safety net then someone under the age of 14 (the juniors and seniors division in regular organized play). So in the balance of liberty vs. security here, I can't help but feel that we've missed the mark. What would keep players safe? A mechanism to punish people who trade with the intent to scam. I know it has shown up in other threads, but the trades that say things like, "Free Pokemon Collector" or "Take my Yanmega Prime, I'm quitting" are significantly more heartbreaking than someone getting scammed on eBay and getting their money back.

 

There has been marketing talk sprinkled throughout the thread. It seems like letting people sell codes becomes really good CRM. If you're not sure with how to catch or punish scammers, I'm sure the community will be more than happy to offer up suggestions. By not offering up a format other than modified, Pokemon has really damaged their secondary market compared to other trading card games who offer vintage, traditional, classic, and extended formats. The ability to sell digital cards seems like a great opportunity to help develop a secondary market for this beloved game. I hope I get to watch that happen.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChaosJim

 

I for one fully support the updated policy. Why should we care if Pokemon gets the profit? Don't we want them to have the money to fund more of the games we all enjoy? I know that it's not exactly a struggling company but it's much like the music industry to me.

 

I hate that there's so much sharing of music, without giving the artist what they earned (your money in support of their music). I can understand creating a unique market that encourages the purchase of music in different forms (i.e iTunes and Amazon offering individual tracks as an alternative to buying the entire album). I don't like that the artists aren't really getting their fair share of the profits this way, in favor of fans getting a "discount" on their tunes. I try to always purchase cd's from the artist website, a concert, or a store that is more generous to the musicians (like a specialty music store).

 

Similarly, I think that Pokemon is creating games that we enjoy, and shouldn't have to beg us to pay them for the service. It's not our Right to play these games, but Pokemon has offered them to us at a price that they believe is reasonable. If you don't like the prices just wait and eventually the games will grow old and lose value, and you can pay the lower prices then, or you can invest a little more now and be thankful that they've delivered something for you that you didn't have before.

 

I guess it's all just about the community and time that I was raised in. I was taught to be thankful, not to be selfish and ungrateful. Someone offers you a meal, you shouldn't insult them for not giving you enough, or for asking you to wash you plate when you're done.

 

Long story, short. I like the change and am glad that it makes it possible for me to get ahold of cards/packs/decks that I couldn't otherwise.

 

 

I dislike your music/pro-musician analogy a great deal. If you were to purchase some Billy Joel CDs, then decide you liked the look of a Billy Joel Boxed set and no longer wanted the old CDs, but no one was willing to make that trade you would only have one option. Spend more cash. Instead, you can (in the real world), sell those old CDs, and turn that cash into the boxed set (give or take). As things work with PTCGO right now, if we translated that over, the result would be that you could never ever listen to Billy Joel again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JasonKlaczynski

 

Don't we want them to have the money to fund more of the games we all enjoy? I know that it's not exactly a struggling company but it's much like the music industry to me.

 

 

 

Apples & oranges. The secondary market isn't taking business away from Pokemon. Digital cards can only be obtained by obtaining codes first. Where does every single code card come from? Only one place: A Booster Pack, which is purchased.

 

 

 

You want a practical analogy? Here's one that actually makes sense: How has the secondary market affected the real life version of the Pokemon TCG? I dare anyone to tell me the option to purchase real singles has had a negative impact on the game.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...