Constructive feedback

[Stroom]

Indeed. All that is needed to be said is COLOR/NUMBER not "These x cards are y". It is only helpful for the first 10 games. After that it starts distracting.

[pinkyandthebrain]

When I see "these 2 cards are ONEs" after clicking on a card of my partner, guess what: I see "2" definately more suggestive than "ONEs". Guys, is that so hard to acknowledge that peoples brains react differently to numbers and letters? And for some weird reason you assume the number of cards clued is more important to be noticed than the type of the cards clued - when one of the two types IS a number?!
It's great that you improved visibility of the color.
It's awful that you keep confusing people with what they clue, and still try to influence what people clue (the immediately visible options or the less visible ones that require additional click). I almost messed that few times because it is so unintuitive that you see the number you want to give an empty clue about, but this clue is not about this number! It forces to think 4x more about what to click to clue what you want to clue... PLEASE PLEASE FIX IT. Text clues are so messy!

In the testing feedback page about 5 months ago I did ask why quantities were necessary (at the time there was a bug and the clue option didn't tally with the actual quantity of that numbered card in hand). I suggested the clue could read "these cards are 1s". (Though would really have liked to say I preferred the old way of cluing but I was trying to embrace the changes!)

[Celtic01]

as u was a tester pinkyandthebrain u maybe know WHY they wanted to change the old way to clue?
I have the feeling that many tester was not so ok with the new way to clue, i readed all the forum and still have no idea and no answer about why it was so important to change that...maybe u know?

[pinkyandthebrain]

as u was a tester pinkyandthebrain u maybe know WHY they wanted to change the old way to clue?
I have the feeling that many tester was not so ok with the new way to clue, i readed all the forum and still have no idea and no answer about why it was so important to change that...maybe u know?

I'm just a guinea pig that was asked to try it out - I didn't know why the clue system was being changed, just knew they wanted to tie it in with the new design of the actual game. We were just testing it for bugs and asked to write what we found and give some thoughts on the game webpage that was set up. Whilst myself and the people I played with were often frustrated with things such as the aesthetics or the new way of cluing I know I tried to keep most of the postings about the bugs that were found that made the game unplayable as I guessed this was more important. I admit, I and perhaps others were too reserved in saying how I/we felt as I was grateful for the fact we were getting new variants in the game and didnt want to detract from the work they were doing to give us this. I thought that when the bugs were ironed out and it was released onto that alpha page of games (which is when I presume many people okay-ed it for general release) there would be more time/voices to address the new mechanics of the game play and the colour/layout etc. I guess this could have resulted in a version that would get a much better public reception with minimal backlash but this fasttrack way has meant the changes/fixes have been rapid because of the overwhelming demand for them?

[hrundel]

I think the clueing system was changed to resemble the real life game where you have to physically point at cards first then say which clue you want to give. That was the rationale of the developers.

as u was a tester pinkyandthebrain u maybe know WHY they wanted to change the old way to clue?
I have the feeling that many tester was not so ok with the new way to clue, i readed all the forum and still have no idea and no answer about why it was so important to change that...maybe u know?

I'm just a guinea pig that was asked to try it out - I didn't know why the clue system was being changed, just knew they wanted to tie it in with the new design of the actual game. We were just testing it for bugs and asked to write what we found and give some thoughts on the game webpage that was set up. Whilst myself and the people I played with were often frustrated with things such as the aesthetics or the new way of cluing I know I tried to keep most of the postings about the bugs that were found that made the game unplayable as I guessed this was more important. I admit, I and perhaps others were too reserved in saying how I/we felt as I was grateful for the fact we were getting new variants in the game and didnt want to detract from the work they were doing to give us this. I thought that when the bugs were ironed out and it was released onto that alpha page of games (which is when I presume many people okay-ed it for general release) there would be more time/voices to address the new mechanics of the game play and the colour/layout etc. I guess this could have resulted in a version that would get a much better public reception with minimal backlash but this fasttrack way has meant the changes/fixes have been rapid because of the overwhelming demand for them?

[Celtic01]

I think the clueing system was changed to resemble the real life game where you have to physically point at cards first then say which clue you want to give. That was the rationale of the developpers.

I guess... The main thing is that we are not in real life. In real life some people create tokens for playing high level and having more fun. I real life u can quickly what u want to say without making mistake and in real life u dont have to reaf something.
As obviously realife and online are for some reason not the same, it s a basis of UX to find the good balance between the original game and the online version. What is sad is that I that they found it and remove it.
In fact i had even more fun to play on BGA than in real life as it was quick and u could play highr level.
I guess for new players it was maybe confusion the 2first game (as i teach friend to use it), but i think with only a tuto or an info bulle for the 2-3first game (in preference for example) would be enought.

[Khoo1]

When I see "these 2 cards are ONEs" after clicking on a card of my partner, guess what: I see "2" definately more suggestive than "ONEs". Guys, is that so hard to acknowledge that peoples brains react differently to numbers and letters? And for some weird reason you assume the number of cards clued is more important to be noticed than the type of the cards clued - when one of the two types IS a number?!
It's great that you improved visibility of the color.
It's awful that you keep confusing people with what they clue, and still try to influence what people clue (the immediately visible options or the less visible ones that require additional click). I almost messed that few times because it is so unintuitive that you see the number you want to give an empty clue about, but this clue is not about this number! It forces to think 4x more about what to click to clue what you want to clue... PLEASE PLEASE FIX IT. Text clues are so messy!

Agreed.
"Clue 1 to 2 cards"

On another note, I like to THANK who made STACKED view in 1 screen on Firefox.
Hanabi is no longer a scrolling game /sarcasm

[Stroom]

Stacked + Fast Hints is much better.

Maybe make it default? Or programmatically set it as default for anyone who has played Hanabi before.
There is still a lot of confusion in the games because people get the new interface and keep making mistakes.

I think the fast hints and available clues should be on top of the player stack. Then, all the buttons you have to click are in one location. Making them be on bottom of the screen means I have to move between my hand and the clues. Another place where we waste time.

Another proposal:
Make it so that you could also drag and drop the fast hints onto the players. Same way it works with playing/discarding cards from my hand. This way, I could pre-select my next hint while it is the other players turn. When he plays, I can automatically respond. Makes playing faster.

[Karl Klammer]

I really appreciate how some usability issues have been very quickly fixed and improved. Very much like how the 4 interface options are also not only hidden in the options menu but that the settings are accessible from the middle of the board.

Very happy now!

[Lara8818]

I play on a wide screen but usually split-screen BGA with another window. Although the updates of stacked layout and fast clues are very much appreciated, many elements are still distractingly tiny unless I zoom in so far that the play logs, player info, and chat are much larger than they need to be - and then I need to zoom out again when I go back to the lobby, then zoom back in, and so on. (Plus, there's some weirdness where going to 90% makes things slightly larger, then 100% and 110% make them smaller, then %125 is larger again? But that might be more browser-specific (Chrome).)

One thing that I think is really exacerbating that problem is that clues are displayed above cards instead of on their faces. Both the cards and the clues could be larger without wasted real estate if the latter were still the case.

As others have mentioned, what order discards happened can be valuable info, it would be handy to be able to see it.

(I'll admit I still have trouble understanding why the new version couldn't have functioned as an optional/default 'skin' that could have been enjoyed by those players who like the aesthetics or find it more efficient, while preserving the old display for those who found its simplicity more pleasant and functional. As I mentioned on the previous thread, this is how it worked when Carcassonne changed, and old/new users can still play smoothly together at the same tables.)