Registered 5 days ago, still don't understand interface

[sourisdudesert]

I have double checked and there are 39 games I have marked as known.

Well... this is the problem. You shouldn't keep 39 games here if you want to play only 1 or 2.

But this is more a "power user" problem: 90% of our users has less than 4 games in this list.

So I got scared and clicked on Cancel

Well... you shouldn't

give me a system, where I choose a game typing (you have a good auto-completion system (well you can't start in the middle and that is a problem but still)) and I get the opened tables with a simple sort by and I will spend my day here (maybe not what you or my boss are looking for )

1. Remove all games from your list.
2. When you want to play game A, click on "Add to my game", use the autocompletion system to add your game
3. See the list of available table, or create a new one

[januszk0]

It seems to me that a good solution would be to add a filter in Play Now so that you can filter the game out of MY GAMES: GAMES YOU WANT TO PLAY NOW.

[GreenVelvet]

Well now I wanna play Seasons or Stone Age
but maybe tomorrow I will be all in for Takenoko.
I am maybe used to the Play Random game that I like a lot on an other website.
And, even if there is not such feature here, I put the games I know all here so that a buddy of me could choose and start a game s.he wants
No offence but you can't say to the 20% do like the 80% around, they are right because they play 3-4 games.
It is a bit like if I am saying a TM player. Hey you are wrong, you should play Lost Cities. Well you get the point I guess.

And yes, a filter in Play now would be exactly what I would like. Plus maybe an alogrithm that predicts the most likely games to start.

[RicardoRix]

it's quite easy to filter games, add and/or cancel the games from your list.
Add - use the selection box.
Cancel, use the little x's.

Under Games, it recommends games that you might want to play, plus additional category lists of games if you're trying to find similar games.

[GreenVelvet]

Well the solution is obvious.
Have no game in my games I want to play list.
This is so absolutely not user-friendly if you ask me but there is no other solution it seems.

[sourisdudesert]

Well the solution is obvious.
Have no game in my games I want to play list.
This is so absolutely not user-friendly if you ask me but there is no other solution it seems.

Well... I really don't know how to say it differently than in my previous post ... "Games you want to play now" list is the list of the game you want to play NOW. So having 39 games in it makes no sense, except if you really want to play any of these games.

So yes, the only good solution if you want to play Stone Age is to have only Stone age is the "Games you want to play now", as this is the only game you want to play now. If you do this, you'll have exactly what you are asking for.

Sorry but I don't know how to explain it differently ...

[GreenVelvet]

That's ok.
I get that.
It is crystal clear.

[Liallan]

Well the solution is obvious.
Have no game in my games I want to play list.
This is so absolutely not user-friendly if you ask me but there is no other solution it seems.

I totally agree with this, and I'm not the only one. The "games you want to play" list is not user friendly, and a royal pain in the rear end to keep changing all the time. If someone ONLY plays live, EVER, and is not interested in turn-based, then maybe that works OK to keep deleting a game from it and adding a different one. (Though that still sounds like a pain in the rear to me.) But for anyone who might also want to play turn-based, there is absolutely nothing weird about having 39 games in your list, because when you play turn based, these games are going to last days or weeks or months, and you may be interested in playing any of your known games. So no one playing turn based wants to delete all their games so they have just Stone Age and Seasons listed in order to play live, and then the next day when they want to take some turn-based invitations, have to turn around and add the other 37 back in again!!

The fact that it's been requested to have separate lists for turn-based and real-time ought to prove that there's nothing wrong with having 39 games in your list, and that other people do have difficulty with this. So I just don't know what is difficult to understand about it or why it "doesn't make sense."

(And GreenVelvet, it's ok to say you play at Yucata, or at least it should be. There's room in this world for more than one gaming site, and a lot of people play at 2 or 3 or 4 different ones. It's no big deal. The only thing I would say is not to expect one site to be like another. I don't think you're expecting this site to be exactly like another site, but just get used to the fact that they are indeed different.)

[Meeple Fool]

I concur. There is absolutely nothing wrong to have 39 games in the list.
Even for people playing live games, it is a pain to keep deleting and adding games to a list.

A well designed and user-friendly interface ought to support a master list of all the games that a user knows/interested and then allow the user to choose a subset for "want to play now." I do not understand why this concept seems so foreign.

Overall, I still enjoy the site and I purchased 4 games because of the site.
However, the "play list" does left a lot for people to desire for.

--

Well the solution is obvious.
Have no game in my games I want to play list.
This is so absolutely not user-friendly if you ask me but there is no other solution it seems.

I totally agree with this, and I'm not the only one. The "games you want to play" list is not user friendly, and a royal pain in the rear end to keep changing all the time. If someone ONLY plays live, EVER, and is not interested in turn-based, then maybe that works OK to keep deleting a game from it and adding a different one. (Though that still sounds like a pain in the rear to me.) But for anyone who might also want to play turn-based, there is absolutely nothing weird about having 39 games in your list, because when you play turn based, these games are going to last days or weeks or months, and you may be interested in playing any of your known games. So no one playing turn based wants to delete all their games so they have just Stone Age and Seasons listed in order to play live, and then the next day when they want to take some turn-based invitations, have to turn around and add the other 37 back in again!!

The fact that it's been requested to have separate lists for turn-based and real-time ought to prove that there's nothing wrong with having 39 games in your list, and that other people do have difficulty with this. So I just don't know what is difficult to understand about it or why it "doesn't make sense."

(And GreenVelvet, it's ok to say you play at Yucata, or at least it should be. There's room in this world for more than one gaming site, and a lot of people play at 2 or 3 or 4 different ones. It's no big deal. The only thing I would say is not to expect one site to be like another. I don't think you're expecting this site to be exactly like another site, but just get used to the fact that they are indeed different.)