| |
BGonline.org Forums
Internet Playing Site Wish List
Posted By: Michael Petch In Response To: Internet Playing Site Wish List (Jason Lee)
Date: Saturday, 22 December 2012, at 7:34 p.m.
I think the problem is that people who frequent BGO do not have a proper perspective of the casual player anymore. I will state that I prefer SafeHarborGames over Gridgammon because it *is* more social. Over 2 years of dice studies and talking to players (including newbies) is that luck (or the apparent lack there of) is a significant negative reinforcement. Specifically the "swingy" nature luck during a match is frowned on. I think that people on this board have advanced so far beyond the casual realm, that they don't see casual players objectively anymore. I actually *strongly* disagree with Ben.
The Luck aspect of this game is why a lot of players (and hosts for that matter) on SHG have been turned off of this game.
If you post achievements, I would do so not as a percentage. So if you have a choice between "You beat 5% of players stronger than you" vs "Beat 5 stronger players" (assume they played 100 stronger players). To an expert the percentage says more, and an absolute number meaningless. To a casual player 5% will seem very negative.
I'll even go out on a limb and say that readers of BGO and those who play GG are less in touch with the social players than those who play on SHG and read R.G.B. . I am of the opinion that many experts have lost an objective perspective of what it means to be a casual player in this day in age.
I wasn't joking when I said last year that if I had to create a purely social site that was to attract social players, I think that manipulating the dice to reduce doubles is actually a positive. I know from experts they'll say it isn't Backgammon. That may be true, but the perceived luck swings in Backgammon with standard dice doesn't fit well into a casual players thinking. That is why I actually defend the 2 dice types on SHG, I only question that it isn't made more obvious. An expert may say that bastardizing the dice doesn't do anything for the game of Backgammon, and based on what I have seen and experienced - I believe the exact opposite.
If I could go back in time, I would eliminate the rules that gives extra power when throwing doubles. I think experts on this board would cringe at that idea, because they see it as requiring more skill to play the game. To the casual player no doubles would probably make the game more enjoyable.
Another facet that casual players seem to dislike - the Doubling Cube. You would be surprised how often I play in a socially competitive tournament (Like Gammonzone) to hear the words "It's not fair to use the cube like that". Some casual players believe that each game should be played out one point at a time, to do otherwise is unfair.
Synopsis: The things that make Backgammon skillful in this day and age, are often the reasons casual players get turned off from it.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.