That may be but until the criteria is changed then that is the criteria we have to use.
If everyone can decide which Criteria they will use it would be chaos.
Whilst a lot of players donât interact with the feature (myself included), AR scanning is still a thing, and you typically do have to walk up to the object youâre scanning if you are bothering with it.
2 Likes
That why people should leave well enough alone and not bother with reports unless for especially egregious stuffâŠ
Far as Iâm concerned, if a waypoint is locally significant enough, and there is a safe place to observe it reasonably close by, then there should be room to bend the rules to just allow it in anyway.
1 Like
I guess. Question is if itâs worth keeping the criterium around for such an incredibly minor reason.
In that case there is a âlocally significantâ waypoint about 2 miles away from me, should be able to bend the rules to just allow it to be positioned in the front of my houseâŠ
We are also going off topic.
The OP did not believe it made sense and was informed it makes perfect sense.
The conversation now is whether the criteria should be changed or should we be able to âbend the rulesâ when it suits usâŠ
I will step back unless the OP wishes to ask for any more info.
1 Like
Good day and welcome to the forum!
I have similar examples which more clearly violates the pedestrian accessibility requirement.
See here:
A plaque with text to be read directly in front of it to make sense
A freaking globe to mark the largest mall in Asia at the time of its completion
There are a lot of questionable urban design that does not account for the pedestrian accessibility of things that should be. But that change should happen out in the real world IMO.
1 Like
Changing the rules of wayfarer is a lot easier than changing urban design overnight.
1 Like
I agree but if we do push for it and denied, it is effectively the same difficulty. Change outside makes for a better sprawl, PGO or not; more systemic and lasting.
1 Like
I completely agree about the importance of AR Scanning!
That is actually why I believe this submission is valid. To properly scan a tall structure like this tower for Nianticâs map, you need the offset distance provided by the sidewalk.
If I were to stand directly against the base (touching it), the AR scan would fail to capture the towerâs geometry. By âwalking up toâ the object on the sidewalk, I am in the optimal position for the interaction you mentioned
1 Like
Staff has not weighed in on this appeal yet. Maybe they will explain to you why it wonât be returned to a pin away from the point of interest itself in order to make it reappear in Pokemon Go. Maybe they wonât. But there is nothing else any of us can say.
Actually, your assumption is incorrect.
Please look at the attached screenshot. I was actually the one who submitted the edit to move the pin FROM far the sidewalk TO the tower itself on Jan 21st. I did this pursuing strict geographical accuracy but for you guys, created problems.
-
Natural Interaction: Nobody interacts with a Tower by pressing their face against the base. You view it from the sidewalk. That is the natural anchor point for a vertical structure.
-
AR Scanning: As @hankwolfman correctly pointed out, you need to âwalk up toâ the object to scan it. But for a tall tower, the optimal scanning position is the sidewalk (offset distance) to capture the geometry. Standing at the base (the current pin location) results in a useless scan of a flat wall.
So, I am not trying to âgameâ the system for PokĂ©mon GO.
2 Likes
To me, if a roundabout has a or is part of a walkpath, it should be eligible with a pin set on the footpath. The walkway is part of the roundabout, the sculpture meant to be âinteractedâ with (looked at) from the footpath. So safe access to the point of interest is guaranteed.
3 Likes
I did not say you did. I said that Niantic would not return it for game reasons. You made a location correction - that was well established - that had the unintended consequence of getting the point of interest removed.
Thanks for the clarification.
Exactly, it was an unintended consequence of striving for âperfectâ accuracy. That is why I believe the sidewalk anchor is the only logical solution here.
As @Paramaribo79 noted above, this roundabout actually features a built-in paved sidewalk. It is not just a traffic island. Therefore, placing the pin on that specific sidewalk ring ensures both:
-
100% Safe Pedestrian Access (as designed by the urban planners).
-
Optimal AR Scanning distance (as discussed with Hank).
I hope Niantic can restore it to this safe, valid anchor point.
3 Likes
No it does not, thatâs an angled cement base. Every crossing around it has a marked pedestrian crossing, meaning pedestrians are meant to cross between them, there is no crossing to this roundabout.
Thanks for the report @baskitoo ,
We have reviewed this location again and stand by our decision to retire this Wayspot.
3 Likes
Iâm not talking about the center⊠Why would anyone want to go to the center of it? I canât see nothing if Iâm at the center of it.
Hey! Just wanna ask if you read all the conversation of just lookup to the coords to make a decision.
Whether Aaron read the conversation is irrelevant, it will not be down to 1 member of staff to make such a change to the criteria which is what you are asking for.
A look at the location, assess with current criteria and inform. That is Aaronâs job here.