dividedbyzero wrote:Optimus Prime wrote:No, it isn't better than the current layout. The eventual goal is to get rid of putting so much information on the side to eventually allow for larger map sizes. Putting everything back on the side does nothing but defeat that purpose.
So, what was wrong with it being below the map ? If the goal is larger maps, I still want to see the colors of my cards, whether or I own any of the lands, and the game settings while I'm taking my turn or preparing to...I did less scrolling before.
Look, I've never complained about the site prior to this. I've been here since 2006 and definitely consider myself one of the veterans and power users of the site. No, I don't have JR's sheer number of games, but I play a lot..I've purchased membership for 3 years and purchased at least 4 other memberships for others. I support the site. I just wish changes like this weren't so arbitrary. Another player has started a thread in Suggs/Bugs to discuss disclosing changes that are coming so there can be some feedback before things are put into place, scripts break, etc. It seems to me that this is a good idea and that the site would want user feedback before changing things.
Adding
optional things isn't a huge deal. I can choose or not choose to play nuclear spoils. I can't choose to reset my game layout so it is more conducive to practical game play. Maybe having a beta interface in the same way we have beta maps - it can utilize the same databases and just have the new front end code base ?
This is not just a matter of resisting change. This is a big deal in changing game play for those of us that tend to have a lot of games running at once.
With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships. I've purchased over $600 worth of memberships in my time and I'm under no illusion that it gives me a say in anything. I'm one of the admins, an actual staff member, and I
still do not know what at least 50% of the new updates are going to include when they go live. It's entirely up to lackattack. He surprises even his top advisors most of the time. It's his right, it's a private business, let's not forget.
Many people make the argument that user testing and user discussion would help avoid these problems, but look at it practically, those don't solve any real problems, except make everything take longer, and the same people who complain about the changes are the same individuals who harp on lackattack over and over about how long things take. Do you really think he wants to give those people more reason to complain? I doubt it, and if you are honest with yourself, you would likely come to the same conclusion. It's sort of a "damned if we do, damned if we don't situation" and you can't tell me it isn't if you look at things honestly. No matter what gets changed, 80% of the comments are negative. Even if we made a groundbreaking change that could be proven to be of benefit to everyone, almost everything we hear back is going to be "what a horrible decisions, change it back!" So I'd be interested in your thoughts on that sometime if you feel inclined to send me a PM, I'd love to hear a counter argument to such a thing.
So many people think that these things are arbitrary decisions, but they aren't, even if nobody ever takes our word for it, they are not arbitrary decisions.
In regards to making everything optional, some things are easy to make optional, and in those cases sometimes lackattack is willing to do so, but sometimes the things that everyone things should just be made optional are
not easy to make that way from a coding standpoint and it takes a cost/benefit decision to determine if it is worth the time to make it so. That is something I would venture a large number of us forget on a regular basis. I mean, how many of us really know how much work it takes to make these things work properly on this website? I build websites for a living, and I don't even know how much work it takes to do some of the stuff lackattack does, so before we throw out accusations about making everything optional and how that would fix it, we should all remember we don't really know what we are talking about, do we?
As an admin I take pride in knowing that some thing that get changed are going to upset people, and trust me, when the admins have their meetings there are regularly occasions where we tell each other that our ideas are bad and that the way we want to do it needs to change otherwise we are going to upset a lot of people, there are at least 20 things that haven't been done because of that, and it's good they weren't, it would have just been bad. But in order for the site to grow, changes have to happen at some point. Is everyone going to like the changes? No, of course not, and some people maybe never will and will leave, but if lackattack tries to appease everyone, or even tries to appease some people at times it just makes his work more difficult and ultimately slows down the progress of the website.
I've been displeased with some decisions sometimes, it happens to all of us, even those of us who have power to make decisions from time to time, but ultimately, it truthfully has
not ruined the website, or your gaming experience in a permanent way, has it? If you really believe so, then I guess you have a decision to make on whether to stay or not, and we will be sad to see you go.
What we all need to remember is that lackattack isn't perfect, I'm not perfect, none of our members are perfect. Sometimes changes happen to the website that aren't incredibly popular, but in prior instances lackattack has shown willingness to try and fix things soon after or as part of a later update if over time its shown that he really did botch things up a little bit, let's try to remember that. He'll get plenty of feedback from the admin team at our next meeting, and he will read all of the feedback and discussion in the forums, and if it really is shown that change is needed I promise he'll make the change when it can be done most reasonably and keep him on track for other things as well.
Being a member of this website is a lot of fun, we have far and away more features and a better quality product for a price that simply cannot be beat. What makes me sad is to see so many people lose sight of that fact and focus on things that are not really all that bad instead of focusing on helping instead of complaining and moaning. Just last night I was encouraging folks in Live Chat to go do some on the fly testing to make sure nuclear spoils didn't really break anything weird. They were more than eager to help instead of feel offended by the changes. We should all focus on that type of mindset when changes are made instead of jumping down throats and feeling like we've been personally slighted.
I fear if we continue down such a negative mindset every time lackattack puts in hours and hours of effort for us that someday he's going to realize his work isn't all that appreciated and decide he's had enough. I'd feel horrible if that happens and would rather say "thanks for the effort, but it looks like it needs some tweaking, how can I help, or how can I get the community to let you know what you need to adjust to make it perfect."
Sorry for the discourse, just sort of spilled out on me.
Regards,
Optimus Prime
