Suggestions

[quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-09 11:49:38" ] [quote name="voidsnake" date="2024-05-09 11:37:45" ] [quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-09 11:00:25" ] [quote name="voidsnake" date="2024-05-09 10:14:39" ] [quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-09 06:42:12" ] [quote name="Churrell" date="2024-05-09 05:57:55" ] [quote name="Almedha" date="2024-05-08 23:41:58" ] I'd really much rather they work on new art and mechanics to add to the game that everyone can and will want to use. [/quote] Maybe this is splitting hairs a little, but there’s almost nothing that everyone WILL want to use. I don’t interact with Dom/exalting, some people don’t use the forums, and every time a breed or gene drops there are people who go “I hate it and I’ll never use it.” It’s not like they should stop making breeds and genes because not everyone will want to use them, so how is this different? [/quote] It is splitting hairs. I'm not saying "no one will use this" because obviously some people will. But in comparison, significantly more people will want to use a new game feature. And, odds are, just about everyone will use it in the beginning. Like Arlo for example. Not nearly as many people want to use it now, but in the beginning it was almost everyone. The obvious difference is that there are a small number of people who don't like and won't use a new material update, and many people who don't like, for example, a gene, seem to come to like and use them over time. I don't think that's true of this update. Though I do like Jemadar's conception of it, and if that was how it worked (lag free) I have zero objections whatsoever. That would require probably as little maintenance of the staff as posible. [/quote] I don't think it's splitting hairs at all. Every suggestion is dependent on how much support people have for it, this suggestion comes up quite a bit and gets a large amount of support every time, so I think that speaks for itself in terms of how many people would appreciate/use the feature. It's not like other mechanics are things Everyone wants and accessibility features are only for a few select people, nothing is for absolutely everyone and 'I don't think people want this' isn't really an argument against a feature since if it really is such a minority of people, it just wouldn't get enough support to be considered in the first place. The main thing the majority of players are interested in is the art and breed/gene/apparel releases and such anyways, which this doesn't interact with at all, mechanic suggestions are always things not everyone will use. And even if this isn't something where everyone would use it in the beginning either, it's something that would allow a lot of people to interact with everything else on the site more comfortably.. forever. It's a feature that won't get less use over time, in fact it would only be more useful to people if there were more eye types/genes/breeds added that people want to be able to filter. Why is this the one suggestion where it absolutely must come at no cost to the devs or have any maintenance or anything, I don't see people going to every other suggestion and saying 'ok but what if it requires occasional Maintenance or causes Lag' just because they wouldn't personally use the feature when there's no reason in the first place to believe that this suggestion would cause problems like that either. Plenty of sites have filtering systems without causing noticeable lag, I'm pretty sure the devs aren't known for adding features to the site that lag everything and then leaving those as is to forever continue to lag the site, if it causes noticeable lag they just wouldn't implement it or would change it if it causes problems, and of course they're going to prioritize content that more people will use and support, so why is this suggestion in particular the one where it seems like everyone is just trying to find excuses to not support it. There are people who cannot comfortably interact (or cannot interact at all) with aspects of the site, who would or may be able to do so with a simple filter being added, why are those people only allowed to be considered if it causes absolutely no problem or any slight minor inconvenience to anyone else. Everything already inherently caters to the majority of people, why does it have to be such a problem to allow people in some minority groups to be able to interact with things too. Accessibility stuff like this should just be normalized whenever it's possible, not only implemented when it's convenient and won't cause any issues at all. [/quote] I don't know. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The number of people who would use an update does matter. I have looked through several threads like this, and one of the reasons it comes up "frequently" is because the same people come up frequently. There's nothing wrong with it being in the mind of the same people all the time, but I disagree about your philosophy on accessibility features. It is no one's responsibility to make my life easier because I maybe got dealt a different hand from you. And it's certainly not okay for me to inconvenience you. I'm of a different mind for stuff like coli, the bits of that which make it unusable for some people can be a good decision - better than this, because this is explicitly about [i]removing[/i] content (on personal preference - not, obviously, from the site at large). [/quote] ah yes because we sure wouldn't want to inconvenience anyone just because someone requires accommodations for anything. I guess people who require accommodations just don't get to have anything at all in society if it isn't convenient. Are you really of the mindset that people with visual impairment shouldn't get to use the internet at all because 'what if it costs Effort to make screen readers'? People with mobility impairments, guess they just can't go places because it would cost effort to build ramps instead of / in addition to stairs or do other things to help that? Accessibility is about making things usable for more people. It's not always just a difference of slightly increasing someone's comfort. Maybe you can manage yourself well enough to use the site without filters, but that isn't true for everyone, people could have phobias/triggers or visual sensitivity or such that completely prevent them from using the site without filters. And I imagine most of the people the site becomes completely unusable for without a filtering system aren't here to support the idea or argue for it because they can't be on the site or forums in the first place, because currently there are no filters, and maybe the thought of seeing triggering profiles they haven't blocked yet even just once in order to know to block the profile image is just too much to deal with and makes the forums unusable. Or maybe the overall experience of not being able to use features like breeding or sharing dragons is so triggering without filters those people just left the site completely already. And those people who aren't able to interact with things because of lack of accessibility features often don't have many other things to go do instead (because of how bad accessibility is in most places) and maybe by adding filtering here, some people would have a singular place to feel safe and enjoy something and be included instead of constantly feeling like they have to endure all of their problems by themselves and constantly suffer and never enjoy anything peacefully just because they don't want to inconvenience anyone. If accessibility options are only something implemented when it's most convenient, people who actually need accommodations to interact with things just aren't able to do much at all in life, and I think that's a problem. [/quote] I don't appreciate the hyperbole. I never said any of those things, so I won't engage further. [/quote] you didn't say those things exactly, I'm just explaining what your reasoning leads to and asking if you've considered that. Feel free to correct me if I'm misinterpreting what you did say, but the general concept of refusing accessibility because "it's not people's responsibility" leads to people who need accommodations not having anything at all and feeling like they aren't allowed to have anything nice, ever. It shouldn't be a privilege for people who need accessibility to be able to interact with things, and I think you don't understand how harmful it is to act like it should be. The fact that some people cannot interact with the site and potentially cannot interact with much else instead either, which could be helped greatly by implementing accessibility such as filtering and giving them a place to interact, is not a hyperbole at all. And those people are constantly unable to interact with things or go places or anything because of the same reasoning you're giving, that they should just deal with their own problems themselves and not expect anyone to help them, and that is just reality for those people. You just don't get to interact with those people and hear their experiences because they can't talk here in the first place, because apparently even getting to be present here and interact on the forums is something that isn't ok to you if it were to cause any inconvenience to anyone, according to your reasoning.

As far as inconvenience goes in regards to this, I only really see it as an inconvenience if it adds lag. The developers will determine what is a priority when it comes to implementing new things. That's kind of part of the job: when a new thing is slated to be added, it is their job to determine what takes priority. It's also okay to say you don't want new features to be set aside for new accessibility. That's just personal preference regardless of if you want to see it negatively or not. In any case, it tells the developers how important it should be in the development process. Every community is different, so some may not even need a feature like this to begin with (be it the imagery in the game or the community it has created). That is valuable, and there's no right or wrong opinion there.

As far as lag goes, the site can become irritating to use or impossible to use (or anywhere in between). It just depends on how bad it is. You don't want lag in your game because that will cause your users to become frustrated. Sometimes to the point of leaving, and that's not good for anyone. Everyone's perception of "small amounts of lag" is going to differ alongside their tolerance for it, so it's best to avoid lag altogether as much as possible. While an extreme example, that's why the attempt at alteration of offspring lists ended up being disabled so quickly.

All that being said, if this causes no issue in performance, I don't see an issue with having it added at some point.

Edit: Just to clarify, my standpoint is this shouldn't be for just eye types if added. Everything should be able to be blocked because I don't see a reason to add such a limitation if we're truly wanting this to help anyone. That said, my stance is going under that assumption rather than just eye types.

The only reason this shouldn't be implemented is if it would cause the greater majority of the player-base some negative drawback (I.e server lag). I think tho this thread got way too out of hand just skimming through it. I guess I don't understand the effect it would have on people who never would use it.

Shouldn't we try to make everyone more comfortable even if it means compromise? Having a warning for certain things that could be triggering should be an option. Some phobias can have real world consequences even if it is just "fear". And sometimes you can't get "over it" and that's okay

If it starts to lag the site, I'm sure it will be removed quickly as soon as they can. I heard this has happened before with hiding offspring names at some point. I think this feature should be up to the staff to determine and potentially prepare for if it does lag.

As a deaf person, I had been denied a sign language interpreter before. While it isn't as comparable to say, a game company not adding a filter to blur things, it tells me that I should never attend there again. It didn't make me feel valued as a human being. Now, moving on to games, I don't expect them to give me visual options in replacement of sounds but it is certainly always appreciated to be considered as a potential player. In some aspects for Flight Rising, it can be pretty hard to interact with others if certain genes or eye types are preventing you from doing so. People shouldn't have to isolate themselves or avoid the site altogether just because of something they may have a hard time controlling or getting help for. Phobias, reactions, or senses to these images can be hard to avoid here as how important they can be to interact with. There's many items that also can be utilized in some capacity even if it's just hoardselling which, again, can prevent interaction with the site features. I still support this feature, just also beyond eye types.

Support!


Proposed specification to this solution, that others have brought up in this thread but wasn’t included in the og post:

- Entirely Opt-In. All features are found in settings, automatically off, but each feature has a toggle button.

- The button for each feature would not stop that feature from existing, it would only appear to be overwritten as “Common” eye type or “Basic” gene, with a note above whatever dragon or morphology it applies to saying “some genes were replaced on this dragon due to one of your settings censoring it. Go to settings to remove this censor.”

- Dragons would be bred the same, appear the same to others, and still have those censored genes. However to you they would appear common, thus removing seeing its result entirely. No other players would be affected.


There is nothing wrong with asking for accommodations. Asking someone for an accommodation is not rude or inconveniencing them, the only one who has say in whether or not this is feasible/efficient/“convenient” are those putting those accommodations into place; thus, the FR staff themselves

It is perfectly reasonable if the staff dub this a technically infeasible action, or if they agree it would be useful/smart but would take a long wait time to complete due to their existing projects. Most of the disagreement happening here is from users who would be unaffected by this accommodation entirely should it even be approved. It would be Opt-In, only visible on the users side.

Due to Flight Rising being a business, they would not agree to begin working on this feature if it was out of their ability or took more resources than they had. Thus the anger and arguements over “what if this feature got implemented” are not realistic, as they are either arguing that FR couldn’t, which they as players have no info on, or are mad that someone is getting accommodations that don’t apply to them, which is unkind and illogical behavior.

I think a low-complexity compromise to this, and other common image filtering suggestions, could be to have a subsection of the user settings with a series of toggles (I know we love toggles here) for Eyes, Primary Genes, Secondary Genes, Tertiary Genes, Skins, and Apparel. These articles would have the options 'Default' and 'Filtered', and if a user selects 'Filtered' then that particular dragon layer type defaults to basic until they select a button to reveal the layer on an individual dragon's page.

It's not elegant, and would result in a bit of tedium on the user side of things where they have to go to individual dragons and evaluate if they want to reveal things, but it might open the door for the 'Filtered' option to actually allow for individual gene filters in the future. It would probably be a fairly low percentage of the site that uses most of these options, so until it can be developed further than something very basic a little curative onus on the user won't hurt.

+1