Not enough users

[Stroom]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

So you just go the personal comment route. Very classy. You are just very entitled to your opinion being the superior one (which it isn't). And you want others to go out of their way to make things the way you want it.

Team game elo is fine. Everything has it's flaws but it is not a big deal. You just like posting angry comments.

[ChiefPointThief]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

So you just go the personal comment route. Very classy. You are just very entitled to your opinion being the superior one (which it isn't). And you want others to go out of their way to make things the way you want it.

Team game elo is fine. Everything has it's flaws but it is not a big deal. You just like posting angry comments.

Not angry at all nor was I trying to get personal. Keep in mind that you've repeatedly called me entitled and used words like stupid to refer to people who simply mentioned ideas here that can help with wait times. Which I was willing to ignore and try to have a meaningful conversation with you. That became increasingly impossible as it became more and more clear that you are commenting on subjects you actually didn't even bother to have any knowledge about but continuously comment about how my ideas are terrible. Two people with different opinions can have exchanges but with you commenting on a subject you don't even know about it makes that exchange pointless.

[Trimpster]

Is this really an issue if you can just use automatic turn-based matchmaking to play an unpopular game?

[CappaCappa]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

So you just go the personal comment route. Very classy. You are just very entitled to your opinion being the superior one (which it isn't). And you want others to go out of their way to make things the way you want it.

Team game elo is fine. Everything has it's flaws but it is not a big deal. You just like posting angry comments.

ignore the troll

[Spudster]

BGA is broke. They stopped progressing and are now only sinking. This sinking does not attract new members.

[Zozoken]

I'm not going to continue to reply in this thread. I was hoping that we would all at least be sympathetic for someone joining the site and expecting a quick game only to find their game of choice does not get many active real time tables. But I suppose their comments about how BGA needs to bring more people in rubbed people the wrong way. That's the only thing I can think of for why we're all basically saying the same thing (the only thing you can do about it is bring friends in to play with you) while not seeing eye to eye about BGA's role in it (a perceived sense of entitlement when none is there).

You were very fair in your assessment of things. Before you leave may I ask if you participated in the bga awards? Were you encouraged (not forced) to try more games so that you can submit honest votes? Did you like any of these games? Thanks in advance for the feedback.

Yes, of course! Voting for game awards is not unique to BGA. It gets people to try out the nominated games (even paid ones) simply due to the fact that if games are nominated for an award, that usually means they are good games. I hadn't played half the games on BGA's game awards and had a week to try them out in order to give an honest vote. If I hadn't played some of them before, I wouldn't have bothered. I wish BGA had extended the time we had to try out these games. With the exception of one game, it was easy to find tables for the games on the week in question. This also happens in the Summer and Winter calendar events and recently with the TCG on KickStarter, Altered.

The one thing that confuses me with the resistance you've received on your ideas on what BGA can do to promote games is that there is absolutely no cost for it. It doesn't affect the nay-sayers at all if BGA does it, and gives better opportunities for players to discover more games. The most recent example of this is the "Classic Collection 2" which brought attention to games like Rummy and Dominoes. So it's an obvious benefit with the only cost being the BGA team working on the news page for it (something they would do anyway). Unless nay-sayers are in disagreement on what BGA has already done to promote games, I don't see the value in discarding the ideas you presented. And when BGA did remove something that helps with this issue, like removing the active games list from the Games In Progress page, many players went to the forums to try to get the BGA team to add it back. Are they campaigning for more features to be removed? If a game is promoted and then the player base shrivels up, it hurts no one and gives a chance to try out the game. Certainly there's no harm in that.

Is this really an issue if you can just use automatic turn-based matchmaking to play an unpopular game?

It shouldn't be but sadly, yes. It would work if the table stayed up for longer, but eventually BGA gives up on searching. Real-time for a majority of games was impossible until they added the notification bell. Turn-based for several games (especially those with higher player counts) will time out before being filled, even if one or two players joined in the meantime. You have to coordinate these tables beforehand and you have to do it outside of BGA.


I'm at the point where Ceaseless was 3 pages ago: "Anyways, it seems this thread has pretty much been resolved. The OP's issue was solved pretty quickly and easily. I doubt there's much point in posting in this thread anymore, so it's unlikely I'll bother." I posted what I felt needed to be posted and hope it is beneficial to those that are scrolling through this thread. Hopefully someone on the BGA team reads it and is motivated to do what they can to shorten wait times like they've been doing. At the very least, the team knows there are people out there that appreciate the efforts they've already made to shorten wait times. Thank you!

Whether you agree or disagree with me, I hope everyone on here gets to play the games they want to play and has fun. That's the point of the platform. Happy gaming!!

[Respublik]

There are literally thousands of users on as I type this:
13 505 online players
10 694 playing

Actually, could the counter be updated to separately display two extra numbers: real-time aka playing now and those who have turn-based open? It would be less misleading that way.

[Trimpster]

0 chance that happens

might as well close the #suggestions forum because it is a waste of time and space, nothing gets implemented, no users are getting listened to, etc...

[TsPeacock]

I've stopped playing certain games here all together because the wait times are just too long.

[daddyotter]

If the wait times are too long, try setting up a turn based game. It will give players an opportunity to get into the game and can snowball to more users for said game.