Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[barsooma]

man, it is a huge stretch to call anything on isotropic a horrible interface design.

false.

  the whole thing is very well written, especially for something that is basically one guy's hobby.

true.

and as gendoikari said, its free so we can't complain anyway. 

false.

you can't fault the software just because you are in autoplay mode. 

false.

What a helpful contribution to this thread!

right back atcha, champ!

[barsooma]

Call me back when you turn 15. dougz is giving you a product for free. Even if it was an absolute piece of garbage, you've got no reason to complain, no right to expect anything more out of him. You haven't given him anything. Heck, he isn't even making money off of ads. Why in the world should he have to give you something? I read your post, and my response still stands: of course it isn't perfect, and nobody's arguing that it is. The point is that he doesn't need to do anything. It can be better, but he doesn't need to make it better. So you can go ahead and think that the world revolves around you, and everyone else's effort is worthless if it doesn't meet with your total satisfaction, but let me tell you, it won't get you very far.

Ok so your attachements are obviously making you a little slow, so maybe you should go back and read the thread from the start.

There is nothing wrong with calling out bad design decisions where they exist. Perhaps dougz will find a few minutes here and there to make some fixes, and if nothing else this thread might be useful to the commercial designers, or someone reimplementing iso in the future.

If you can admit that it's not perfect, why are you arguing so hard against people pointing out its flaws?

[WanderingWinder]

Call me back when you turn 15. dougz is giving you a product for free. Even if it was an absolute piece of garbage, you've got no reason to complain, no right to expect anything more out of him. You haven't given him anything. Heck, he isn't even making money off of ads. Why in the world should he have to give you something? I read your post, and my response still stands: of course it isn't perfect, and nobody's arguing that it is. The point is that he doesn't need to do anything. It can be better, but he doesn't need to make it better. So you can go ahead and think that the world revolves around you, and everyone else's effort is worthless if it doesn't meet with your total satisfaction, but let me tell you, it won't get you very far.

Ok so your attachements are obviously making you a little slow, so maybe you should go back and read the thread from the start.

There is nothing wrong with calling out bad design decisions where they exist. Perhaps dougz will find a few minutes here and there to make some fixes, and if nothing else this thread might be useful to the commercial designers, or someone reimplementing iso in the future.

If you can admit that it's not perfect, why are you arguing so hard against people pointing out its flaws?

I've read the thread, and I don't have any problem with it - except for your extremely ungrateful posts.



(Don't feed trolls. Don't feed trolls. Don't feed trolls.)

[barsooma]

Call me back when you turn 15. dougz is giving you a product for free. Even if it was an absolute piece of garbage, you've got no reason to complain, no right to expect anything more out of him. You haven't given him anything. Heck, he isn't even making money off of ads. Why in the world should he have to give you something? I read your post, and my response still stands: of course it isn't perfect, and nobody's arguing that it is. The point is that he doesn't need to do anything. It can be better, but he doesn't need to make it better. So you can go ahead and think that the world revolves around you, and everyone else's effort is worthless if it doesn't meet with your total satisfaction, but let me tell you, it won't get you very far.

Ok so your attachements are obviously making you a little slow, so maybe you should go back and read the thread from the start.

There is nothing wrong with calling out bad design decisions where they exist. Perhaps dougz will find a few minutes here and there to make some fixes, and if nothing else this thread might be useful to the commercial designers, or someone reimplementing iso in the future.

If you can admit that it's not perfect, why are you arguing so hard against people pointing out its flaws?

I've read the thread, and I don't have any problem with it - except for your extremely ungrateful posts.



(Don't feed trolls. Don't feed trolls. Don't feed trolls.)

Ok, so you think I'm an ungrateful troll, and I think you're a sycophantic toady. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[dondon151]

I'm getting a "if you don't like the movie, why don't you make a better one?" vibe from this thread.

Which is a mentality that I completely disagree with. It's not wrong to criticize something, even if you're getting it for free, and even if you can't do one better. From just a basic engineering standpoint, DougZ is designing a product for a group of consumers. He should care about its quality even if he's getting nothing back in the way of tangible benefits.

Now, it just so happens that most people are plenty satisfied with Isotropic having a few very minor bugs here and there - and that's perfectly fine - but the attitude that complaints should be stifled really rubs me the wrong way.

[Eevee]

back to the actual topic:

#1 for me would be autoplaying all my treasure in the endgame with farmland on board (its bad enough to make me often veto farmland just to avoid this).

[Papa Luigi]

Love Isotropic. There are only a few things about it that bother me:

- Like someone else said, not auto-playing Fool's Gold, although that's pretty minor. There are no disadvantages to playing FG along with all your other treasure.

- I kinda wish the card popups would come up instantly, no pause at all. Don't know how easy or hard it would be to do this. A few websites have instant mouseovers but most mouseover actions happen after a short pause.

- The autoscrolling can be slightly annoying.

PS I'm not complaining and there's a difference between constructive criticism and complaining. Also it's good for us to share our issues with Isotropic in case someone has a workaround they can share. I don't see how this thread could be interpreted as mean-spirited; what's wrong with providing feedback?

[blueblimp]

I'm getting a "if you don't like the movie, why don't you make a better one?" vibe from this thread.

Which is a mentality that I completely disagree with. It's not wrong to criticize something, even if you're getting it for free, and even if you can't do one better. From just a basic engineering standpoint, DougZ is designing a product for a group of consumers. He should care about its quality even if he's getting nothing back in the way of tangible benefits.

Now, it just so happens that most people are plenty satisfied with Isotropic having a few very minor bugs here and there - and that's perfectly fine - but the attitude that complaints should be stifled really rubs me the wrong way.

While I agree with you (as there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism), barsooma is just ridiculous.

[barsooma]

I'm getting a "if you don't like the movie, why don't you make a better one?" vibe from this thread.

Which is a mentality that I completely disagree with. It's not wrong to criticize something, even if you're getting it for free, and even if you can't do one better. From just a basic engineering standpoint, DougZ is designing a product for a group of consumers. He should care about its quality even if he's getting nothing back in the way of tangible benefits.

Now, it just so happens that most people are plenty satisfied with Isotropic having a few very minor bugs here and there - and that's perfectly fine - but the attitude that complaints should be stifled really rubs me the wrong way.

While I agree with you (as there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism), barsooma is just ridiculous.

I'll eat up all your crackers and your licorice.

[dondon151]

While I agree with you (as there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism), barsooma is just ridiculous.

But he really isn't, at least on the level of complaining about Isotropic. His posts toward certain users are rather caustic, but that's not particularly relevant. Posts like these were mostly unprovoked and clearly demonstrate the converse of what I'm saying:

Just because you CAN complain doesn't mean you should...

(Really? How did this manage to get to +5? Are there so many like-minded people on this board?)

right. i believe there are alternate options for playing dominion online available, you can always go to one of those.

dougz is giving you a product for free. Even if it was an absolute piece of garbage, you've got no reason to complain, no right to expect anything more out of him. You haven't given him anything. Heck, he isn't even making money off of ads. Why in the world should he have to give you something?

[Fabian]

ITT people still pay attention to barsooma for some reason?

[greatexpectations]

man, i don't think that my comment was offensive to anyone. in response to your post that mine and some other comments were unprovoked, i will point you to the original post of the thread.

"Horrible, horrible interface design."

to me, constructive criticism and what each of us dream isotropic could be is one thing.  but many of these posts (and threads similar to this have been done before, so im probably influenced by those as well) reek of a sense of entitlement which i find a bit frustrating. 

[WanderingWinder]

While I agree with you (as there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism), barsooma is just ridiculous.

But he really isn't, at least on the level of complaining about Isotropic. His posts toward certain users are rather caustic, but that's not particularly relevant. Posts like these were mostly unprovoked and clearly demonstrate the converse of what I'm saying:

Just because you CAN complain doesn't mean you should...

(Really? How did this manage to get to +5? Are there so many like-minded people on this board?)

right. i believe there are alternate options for playing dominion online available, you can always go to one of those.

dougz is giving you a product for free. Even if it was an absolute piece of garbage, you've got no reason to complain, no right to expect anything more out of him. You haven't given him anything. Heck, he isn't even making money off of ads. Why in the world should he have to give you something?

Not sure what you're saying about the last two things here. But I'll tell you how that comment got to +5. The thing is, you can complain about anything. The whole point of my comment isn't that the interface should be fireproof, it's that I don't think there are any problems with it where barsooma is saying there are some. So in my view, he's really nit-picking when there's no reason to. Now, it's fine with you to disagree. But his 'false' comments... well, they're technically true, because man, it's not absolutely totally 100% perfect. You aren't going to get absolutely totally 100% perfect. Ain't gonna happen. So like, here's the deal: somebody can walk up to you on the street and hand you a box of frozen ice-cream-cone drumstick treats, and man, he gave you chocolate, and you like chocolate, but you really prefer chocolate with nuts. So you CAN complain, but let me tell you, you really shouldn't.

[barsooma]

man, i don't think that my comment was offensive to anyone. in response to your post that mine and some other comments were unprovoked, i will point you to the original post of the thread.

"Horrible, horrible interface design."

to me, constructive criticism and what each of us dream isotropic could be is one thing.  but many of these posts (and threads similar to this have been done before, so im probably influenced by those as well) reek of a sense of entitlement which i find a bit frustrating.

For the record greatexpectations, I don't find your original comment offensive.
But I do disagree with parts of it, for similar reasons to those eloquently given by dondon upthread.

While the original post "Horrible, horrible interface design." (NOT by me for those just joining us) puts it kinda strongly, I don't think anyone can dispute that there are some issues with the isotropic interface. A few examples:

- Autoscrolling makes it almost unplayable on iphone, ipad
- Lobby refresh behavior makes entering constraints frustrating
- Moat is so confusing that it requires a FAQ entry

The thing is, calling out bad design does not have to be interpreted as a personal attack on dougz, like WW and maybe you seem to want to do.
For people interested in design, it's just an exercise in critiquing, and a possible opportunity for things to be improved.

[philosophyguy]

To add to what WW said: the problem with these kinds of threads is that the tone can move very quickly from "it would be nice if isotropic did this too" to "isotropic sucks because it doesn't do X". And, that shift is not entirely in the control of the poster—it's really easy for someone who has put a lot of time into a project to take criticism personally, even if it's not meant that way.

The bottom line is that putting together something like isotropic is hard. And unlike Dondon, I don't think DougZ necessarily has to be interested in what the consumers think. He can say: "I did this for fun; if it's not fun for you, go make your own." The assumption that DougZ should be acting under a producer/consumer relationship is already an imposition on his good will. There's no reason to presume that DougZ wants your feedback, quite frankly. If he did, he knows exactly where to go to ask fo it. As a community that benefits from DougZ's work, it's our responsibility to recognize that the work is largely unrewarded and can be really exhausting/frustrating at times. So I get really nervous when I see a thread critiquing this project, because a lot of people can innocently point out valid issues but what DougZ ends up hearing is "People don't appreciate what I do." And that can be what he hears, even if every individual poster is grateful, simply because of the volume of comments and errors in tone.

[ftl]

While I agree with you (as there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism), barsooma is just ridiculous.

But he really isn't, at least on the level of complaining about Isotropic. His posts toward certain users are rather caustic, but that's not particularly relevant.

It IS relevant, for the reason philosophyguy posted:

To add to what WW said: the problem with these kinds of threads is that the tone can move very quickly from "it would be nice if isotropic did this too" to "isotropic sucks because it doesn't do X".

In a thread like this, it's very easy to cross that line. Caustic and rude posts make the thread crash and burn onto the wrong side of it.

Yeah, I'd have fun talking about possible things that iso COULD do better. Or talk about a wishlist for the commercial version, or something. But not in a thread like this.

[rrenaud]

TL:dr; screw politeness.

I am skeptical that any comment about isotropic, no matter how harsh, is really going to upset Doug.

Just because it's free and awesome doesn't mean you should sugar coat criticism.  It the criticism is valid, it's valid.

Sure, barsooma has trolled before (wtf was that Donald X says about the rules is irrelevant because he changed his mind on some trivial detail?), but I think everything he has said in this thread has been reasonable.

[WanderingWinder]

TL:dr; screw politeness.

I am skeptical that any comment about isotropic, no matter how harsh, is really going to upset Doug.

Just because it's free and awesome doesn't mean you should sugar coat criticism.  It the criticism is valid, it's valid.

Sure, barsooma has trolled before (wtf was that Donald X says about the rules is irrelevant because he changed his mind on some trivial detail?), but I think everything he has said in this thread has been reasonable.

Really?

man, it is a huge stretch to call anything on isotropic a horrible interface design.

false.

  the whole thing is very well written, especially for something that is basically one guy's hobby.

true.

and as gendoikari said, its free so we can't complain anyway. 

false.

you can't fault the software just because you are in autoplay mode. 

false.

Now, his first two points here are ok. I tend to think that it is a huge stretch on the first one to call it horrible, but you know it could be improved, so no big deal. But the last two things here. You CAN complain about a FREE service? I mean, you can, but you don't really have a leg to stand on. Notice there's a big differences between complaining and criticizing. And You can fault the software for being in autoplay mode? What? I mean you can, but you're just wrong. The code does what it always does, and you aren't paying attention, you make your own mistake. Dude, that's on you.

[greatexpectations]

just tossing this out there...a quote from the thread that created the forum the current topic is posted in:

Yeah, a forum here for feedback might be useful.  Though I don't promise to make any particular changes, no matter how many people here might agree they want them...   

[barsooma]

And You can fault the software for being in autoplay mode? What? I mean you can, but you're just wrong. The code does what it always does, and you aren't paying attention, you make your own mistake. Dude, that's on you.

I'll admit that this one is pretty weak, but still.
The mark of a great user interface is that it makes it easy to do what you want, and hard to do what you don't want to do.

Suppose you had a table saw with no blade guard or anti-kickback features. One day you're not as careful as you could be, slip up and cut off 4 of your fingers.
Yes it's your fault for being on autopilot, but the design still could be improved, and hence you could assign it some blame for your accident.

EDIT: and it's not like there's been no efforts to avoid this problem, for example the non-autoplay of copper with GM.

[WanderingWinder]

And You can fault the software for being in autoplay mode? What? I mean you can, but you're just wrong. The code does what it always does, and you aren't paying attention, you make your own mistake. Dude, that's on you.

I'll admit that this one is pretty weak, but still.
The mark of a great user interface is that it makes it easy to do what you want, and hard to do what you don't want to do.

Suppose you had a table saw with no blade guard or anti-kickback features. One day you're not as careful as you could be, slip up and cut off 4 of your fingers.
Yes it's your fault for being on autopilot, but the design still could be improved, and hence you could assign it some blame for your accident.

EDIT: and it's not like there's been no efforts to avoid this problem, for example the non-autoplay of copper with GM.

Sure, and you can say that 'improve X, Y, and Z.' Like you did in your post before this one. That's great! Now, I don't actually agree with you that those are major problems, but I encourage you to post them if you think they are. We have a difference of opinion there that I'm totally okay with. But what you did at the beginning of the thread is say that it's not the guys fault for cutting his own fingers off. And hey, there ought to be safety guards there, but it IS the guy's fault. Dude shouldn't be going up to the designer of the table saw and complaining a him that 'because of you, I don't have fingers any more." But I don't have problems with the guy going up to the company or the designer and being like 'hey, you should put these things like safety guards in'. And they should definitely do that. Here, it's not as big a deal as cutting fingers off, so there's less imperative to fix it. And there's further less imperative because you're using HIS property out of his kindness. You don't have to use it. He's not charging you to use it.
/rant

[RisingJaguar]

back to the actual topic:

#1 for me would be autoplaying all my treasure in the endgame with farmland on board (its bad enough to make me often veto farmland just to avoid this).

It wouldn't be productive to remove the auto-play treasure button, as you can already click individual treasures... seems like it would be your fault if you avoid that and auto-play...

Have like some sort of "play all but gold/silver/copper/each treasure" buttons? Seems a little much to have for EVERY turn in a game with farmlands...

[blueblimp]

And You can fault the software for being in autoplay mode? What? I mean you can, but you're just wrong. The code does what it always does, and you aren't paying attention, you make your own mistake. Dude, that's on you.

OK, I have to disagree here. Humans are going to make mistakes. It's valid to ask people to make fewer mistakes, but people will still make mistakes. Part of good UI design is minimizing the impact of human error.

I think isotropic does this pretty well already, for the most part. The "?!" feature is really good, since it prevents a lot of common errors and rarely pops up when you don't want it. In principle it's unnecessary if people were just to make fewer errors, but it still saves me from gaffes even after playing thousands of games on isotropic.

[Deadlock39]

It wouldn't be productive to remove the auto-play treasure button, as you can already click individual treasures... seems like it would be your fault if you avoid that and auto-play...

Have like some sort of "play all but gold/silver/copper/each treasure" buttons? Seems a little much to have for EVERY turn in a game with farmlands...

It might just be nice to have the red ?! If you have more than $6 in hand (can play $6 without playing all your treasure) and Farmland is on the board I guess.  I've never really had problems with Farmland though.  Quarry/Grand Market bit me once or twice I think.

[WanderingWinder]

And You can fault the software for being in autoplay mode? What? I mean you can, but you're just wrong. The code does what it always does, and you aren't paying attention, you make your own mistake. Dude, that's on you.

OK, I have to disagree here. Humans are going to make mistakes. It's valid to ask people to make fewer mistakes, but people will still make mistakes. Part of good UI design is minimizing the impact of human error.

I think isotropic does this pretty well already, for the most part. The "?!" feature is really good, since it prevents a lot of common errors and rarely pops up when you don't want it. In principle it's unnecessary if people were just to make fewer errors, but it still saves me from gaffes even after playing thousands of games on isotropic.

I don't disagree with anything you say. However, none of that makes it the code's fault. It's still the person's fault, even if the code/UI could be better designed.
Unless the code doesn't do something that it says it does.