Live data from Hacker News

Good software knows when to stop

ogirardot.writizzy.com

241–250 of 304 posts

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#241

> Ignore feature requests — don't build what users ask for; understand the underlying problem instead not quite in the same area, but this advice reminds me of blizzard and world of warcraft. for years and years, people requested a "classic" WoW (for non-players, the classic version is an almost bug-for-bug copy of the original 2004-2005 version of the game). for years and years, the reply from blizzard was "you thin…

To be fair on the Blizzard example, I think Blizzard could have also made the player base just as happy by, doing as your quote said, understanding the underlying problem. It wasn't only a "we want WoW classic bug for bug," it was "the modern game has become so unrecognizable that it's basically WoW 2.0, you ruined it with the modern systems" Blizzard could have rolled back LFR/LFG, class homogenization, brought back…

> Blizzard could have rolled back LFR/LFG, class homogenization, brought back complicated and unique talent trees, remove heirlooms, re-add group guests and world mini-bosses, remove flying, etc. and players likely would have been happy.

That would be a tremendous failure. There are millions of players who love LFR/LFG, who love somewhat balanced nature of the game, etc. You would lost all of them in favor of Classic players.

The truth is, a lot of changes Blizzard made to the game, were good ones. If you would browse WoW Classic forums, you'd find plenty of players requesting retail features to be added to Classic game. They want LFD because they're tired sitting for hours being denied for dungeons, because their class is not very good. They want class homogenization, because their beloved class is genuinely lacks tools to be useful.

When you make any change to the game, some player will love it and some player will hate it. Over time more and more players will feel alienated. But other players will come and they won't know other game. There's no simple solution here, other than maintain several versions of the game for different players. One size does not fit all.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I've watched some videos on wow by Kevin Jordan, who was on the original team. He said the original game was built on 3 pillars: 1. Advancement over time. 2. Player interaction. Hard content should be hard in order to push players into working together to overcome challenges. 3. The world is a character in the game. Even when you eventually got mounts later in the game, they made it so mobs can knock you off & d…

> And the LFG system. The LFG system basically killed most social interaction in WoW. So if you played for that, you got excluded. They also sort of killed build diversity, but there was no build diversity in classic either, at least if you wanted to raid. The grinding... I don't miss it. That could have used toning down.

> The LFG system basically killed most social interaction in WoW.

I started playing Anniversary vanilla one year ago. I played through it all and now I'm playing Anniversary TBC. I visited many dungeons. There's no LFG system, yet I didn't find any social interactions in dungeons. I'm pretty sure the whole social interactions thing is overblown. 99% of dungeons is like leader silently invites you or you write "inv holy pala GS 1400" and he silently invites you. You silently run through dungeons, silently leave. That's about it. There are no interactions. Zero. Some people write "hi" and "ty", some don't bother.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And the LFG system. The LFG system basically killed most social interaction in WoW. So if you played for that, you got excluded. They also sort of killed build diversity, but there was no build diversity in classic either, at least if you wanted to raid. The grinding... I don't miss it. That could have used toning down.

> The LFG system basically killed most social interaction in WoW. I started playing Anniversary vanilla one year ago. I played through it all and now I'm playing Anniversary TBC. I visited many dungeons. There's no LFG system, yet I didn't find any social interactions in dungeons. I'm pretty sure the whole social interactions thing is overblown. 99% of dungeons is like leader silently invites you or you write "inv ho…

Might also be a feature of cross realm play. Or whatever is cross server play these days, I haven't touched WoW in a long time.

If you know you're not likely to ever meet those people again, you don't bother.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#244

> Ignore feature requests — don't build what users ask for; understand the underlying problem instead not quite in the same area, but this advice reminds me of blizzard and world of warcraft. for years and years, people requested a "classic" WoW (for non-players, the classic version is an almost bug-for-bug copy of the original 2004-2005 version of the game). for years and years, the reply from blizzard was "you thin…

Sure but games are entertainment, not software, if we're being pedantic.

You can't really map b2b enterprise software tropes onto b2c entertainment products, as ActiBlizz would discover.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#245

> Ignore feature requests — don't build what users ask for; understand the underlying problem instead not quite in the same area, but this advice reminds me of blizzard and world of warcraft. for years and years, people requested a "classic" WoW (for non-players, the classic version is an almost bug-for-bug copy of the original 2004-2005 version of the game). for years and years, the reply from blizzard was "you thin…

To be fair on the Blizzard example, I think Blizzard could have also made the player base just as happy by, doing as your quote said, understanding the underlying problem. It wasn't only a "we want WoW classic bug for bug," it was "the modern game has become so unrecognizable that it's basically WoW 2.0, you ruined it with the modern systems" Blizzard could have rolled back LFR/LFG, class homogenization, brought back…

To be fair to this example it was also an tough situation: imagine MS trying to release W10 Classic with W11 still in prod!

E.g. the older ver may well be better, and even what most users want, but pulling off the optics of selling both without damaging the modern variant is difficult if you're not c-level. The internal champion would basically be ending their career with "yeah I messed up the product let's roll back". Also sends a very interesting signal to shareholders and competitors about the direction of the corp.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#246
post #239

Good blog posts know to stop before recommending books by a fascist.

The opinions on DHH on some subjects don’t invalidate his expertise on some other subjects. See also Musk or Ford.

Given how extreme those opinions are, it does bring up questions on his judgement in general, and you can just not give money to him and instead buy and recommend other people's books.

> expertise on some other subjects. See also Musk

what expertise?

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#247
post #38

Link this to the Spotify product developers

Good example. Spotify today is noticeably worse.

I switched to Apple Music last year because of that. Spotify now has promoted songs in playlists and that was enough for me to cancel.

I will say the music discovery on Apple Music is lousy compared to Spotify, but oh well.

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#248

> Ignore feature requests — don't build what users ask for; understand the underlying problem instead not quite in the same area, but this advice reminds me of blizzard and world of warcraft. for years and years, people requested a "classic" WoW (for non-players, the classic version is an almost bug-for-bug copy of the original 2004-2005 version of the game). for years and years, the reply from blizzard was "you thin…

There is no cookie-cutter approach to all software products at once.

"I want classic sound / look / feel" of entertainment products like WoW is very different from, say, "I want old spreadsheet shortcuts / simpler UI" of office products where you have to actually balance many functional features that are in demand with simplicity and past product behaviour some of your users got used to.

Edit: I think I just rubber ducked myself with this comment into understanding that it is user segmentation which is key regardless of your product; real challenge is to try embedding and balancing all product features as a single package, instead of splitting core product into multiple different parts that fit different segments (like Blizzard did)

Re: Good software knows when to stop

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

App is slow. It plays music video content as default. Gui has many non interesting parts. I just want a list of albums and songs. I guess I just want it to be "boring but functional. :)

and messaging etc. making it a social network

And “commercially promoted” songs in playlists
Post reply on HN