Thanks for responding Fizzer. To preface my response, I want to first state that my aggression is only targeted at your arguments, and not meant to come off as overtly agro to you personally. I feel as though you've hand waved quite a few of my suggestions. See below:
> Numbers keys are used for entering attack/deploy quantities, so Q/A were chosen to avoid conflicts. Of course these happen at different times so numbers could still work, but imo it's preferable to use different keys since it makes accidents more unlikely (for example, if you think the attack/transfer dialog is open and try typing numbers, you'd accidentally enter hotkeys if the number keys were the hotkeys. Easy to happen when entering lots of orders quickly)
You are attacking the hypothetical option I brought up rather than the concept of the suggestion. The number keys may not have been the best example, but the premise remains unaddressed by you. The premise being that having macros to rotate forward/backward is super unfriendly to use and should be replaced with action defined macros. Alternatively, and in order to make the game easier to play for all players, you could just allow users to define these themselves, and leave the defaults as they are now.
Think about it like this: the current control scheme (rotational) is similar to a car's shifter. You can go forward or back. However, the UI shows buttons. The user interacts with them by tapping or clicking said buttons. Surely you must agree that form a design philosophy, these things are at odds with each other.
> Warzone is a cross-platform game, and most people play from mobile, and mobile doesn't have the concept of right-click. My core design concept is to keep the interface the same across all platforms, which avoids players having to re-train themselves every time they switch platforms, so nothing game-essential should rely on concepts that don't exist on touchscreens like right-click, hover, hotkeys, or scroll wheels.
(1) To be fair, this game started as a web game. While I'm sure most of your revenue comes from mobile users, that doesn't mean you have to abandon desktop users. Nor does it mean you have to have a "one size fits all" development strategy. I find that the handwaving of my suggestion here comes off as "fuck your desktop, play on your phone".
(2) Designing a game or a program around the lowest common dominator should be a high priority, I agree. But when your catering to said domination creates an extremely hostile gameplay experience for users on desktop, then I'm sure we can both agree that the design philosophy has failed.
(3) To combat the point about users being forced to 'retrain themselves every time they switch platforms' (which is hardly a good faith argument considering re-learning in this hypothetical only happens the one time they switch platforms and in a program with great design sense the cross over should be relatively natural), you could just allow users to define these themselves, and leave the defaults as they are now.
(4) Even though the user experience on desktop and on a phone are objectively identical, this does not change my criticism that the ratio of inputs to desired action is insanely high for what is essentially a point and click game. Some users may not have issue with that, but users with physical constraints, disabilities would beg to differ. In addition, you kill everyone's ability to become more efficient by the option entirely. I see that around 62% of your games are real time. There's a lot of players where that number is >90%. Shaving off 3 or 4 clicks per action is a huge QoL upgrade for us. With so many real time games having 1-2 minute turns, the lack of flexibility here is objectively game breaking. Should everyone just increase the timer to accommodate that? Of course not, because that would be addressing a symptom rather than the problem.
> Click+drag is already used to pan around the map. Of course, you could have it deploy when you start on a territory you own and pan when you start on a territory you don't own, but that would be terrible. What if you were zoomed in on an area that's entirely made up of your own territories? It would be impossible to pan the map. Also when quickly panning around, it would cause accidental deploys all over the place whenever you accidentally started a pan near your own territory.
(1) Click and drag is already used around the map, yes. It was an example
. It could be shift+click. It could be ctrl+click. It could even be the dreaded right click that went largely unaddressed because "touch screen". The point being is that there's a huge canvas here for improving the way you interact with the game. You'll notice in this section "(3) Why are we not using a click+drag combo to deploy?" I wrote 3 paragraphs
to explain the function behind my suggestion. I'm disappointed that you not only ignored the premise of the argument, but also replied to just the heading title as if the explanation you gave acknowledged the entirety of the point.
(2) If you need an example of how to avoid these obvious conflicts in your control scheme...just download Google Earth. Or go to http://maps.google.com
. Holding down a modifier key while clicking and dragging clearly is a interaction scheme that is both intuitive and purposeful to the laymen. Alternatively, you could just allow users to have some authority over how their own personal inputs are defined in the game, and leave the defaults for all users as they are now.
> See #2
Once again, I'm extremely disappointed that you felt the need to reply to me yet did not put in any effort in hearing the suggestions laid out before you. Do you think I'm roasting you? Are you taking this as a personal insult? As someone who works in a creative field with a lot of subjective reasoning within collaborative projects, your response rings a similar tune to conversations with individuals on teams who were incapable of hearing criticism of their idea as anything other than "your idea bad and that means your bad".
I'm not trying to be rude or put down the game in anyway. I love Warzone, and I'm trying to make it experience of playing it less cumbersome for myself and others. But I digress, here's my response to the argument you copy+pasted:
(1) Just make the scroll function only work when the mouse moves over the deploy/transfer box...because guess what? The zoom function doesn't even work in the current build when the mouse is over the box!
. The 'conflict' here is already resolved, the functionality just needs to be added. Its a funny coincidence that argument you spent the least amount of effort engaging with might also be the suggestion that requires the least amount of effort!
> Generally it works wherever there is a text box, such as attack/transfer dialog. But it has to be coded by hand for each place so it's possible some are missed.
I personally think that every single dialogue box that needs to be cleared should be dismissible via hitting "enter". Right now this is crucial for me and players like me.
> Sometimes highlighting text is important since people want to copy/paste things. I'm not sure of a way to prevent accidental ones without disabling highlighting completely.
Fair enough, admittedly this was the least contentious suggestion I had. Final thoughts
I'll reiterate my first paragraph here: I'm not trying to be rude and I hope you see my passion for the game as passion rather than personal anger. I chose to be aggressive here because I felt you did not engage with some of the suggestions here and as someone who genuinely loves this game, it makes me feel that you do not care about my experience unless I pick up a phone. I'd be curious to see what % of your oldest active users play on desktop. I'd also be curious to see what % of the top ranked players play on desktop. Onboarding new users obviously is a top priority in a venture like this, but between the interface, the paywalled features (mentioned in a separate thread), and the generally confusing global UI, you're giving users a lot of reasons to not stick around. I want
to stick around, but right now playing warzone is really fucking hard
compared to its competitors.
I think your design philosophy is in the right ball park, just in the wrong spot. Typically when devs have dedicated players or a minority on a separate platform, they give them flexibility so that they can choose how to use the program/game, because the constant patching and upgrading for a smaller demographic is too time intensive. If you take anything away from this, I beg of you to please just give us the option. Add some customization for all users
in how they interact with this game and I promise you that you will see a huge improvement in user retention. I've suggested this game to so many colleagues and family members, individuals who work in software development, entertainment, and general service industry. Only one of them still plays: my mom, who is retired and has 0 technology experience. That would be a success if it didn't make the experience so dreadful for everyone else who found the game too cumbersome to play. It was only after so many people in my circle rejected the game over what is essentially UI based issues that I realized how unignorable it is.
The simplest game changing fixes
- Left click to transfer, right click to deploy.
- Scroll wheel on slider box
- Enter closes all prompts
- A single button push that commits (if you meet the turns requirements) in both commerce and regular gameplay, disabled by default as to avoid accidental committing
I can only do so much with greasemonkey myself. Please reconsider the attention you've given on this matter. You are losing troves of players who love the concept, but hate the experience.