Messages

Why not a shared list between friends?  As long as you trust each other's judgement that would mean as soon as one of you found a troll the others wouldn't have to suffer through it.  Trust is the key word here in that if they just didn't like someone and blocked them you wouldn't be playing them either.  Shared lists have usage like this in many other environments.  My phone, for example, uses one to block telemarketers.

I'm not in favor of sharing lists automatically.

What do you mean by sharing lists automatically?  If you're going to share a list and someone copies it statically you could still end up in the same scenario.  I'm referring to being able to essentially "include x user's list" in my own list.  When it gets updated so does mine.  Again this is a common practice of shared lists for blocking unwanted things.

This is exactly what I am against.  If I have to manually look at your list and add the people there to my list, I may find names I don't want to blacklist due to having positive interaction with them.  If your list just updates mine, I might a) not know there is someone on my list who I don't want to be there, and b) I might get banned by a bunch of top players because one person got mad at something I might have done inadvertently.

Yes, if everyone is copying everyone else's list, the same result could happen, but I'd like to think that doing it manually will at least cause most players to pick and chose based on their own experience or research in the forum/chat who the problem players are and focus on blacklisting them rather than arbitrarily locking players out of the community who do not deserve it.

This is a good idea.  In fact, I do this when playing IRL.

Second this.  maybe also a switchable option to let your friends see your list.

Why not a shared list between friends?  As long as you trust each other's judgement that would mean as soon as one of you found a troll the others wouldn't have to suffer through it.  Trust is the key word here in that if they just didn't like someone and blocked them you wouldn't be playing them either.  Shared lists have usage like this in many other environments.  My phone, for example, uses one to block telemarketers.

I'm not in favor of sharing lists automatically.  It could lead to situations where one person blacklists another for reasons that are personal or due to one-time occurrences that don't reflect the banned players typical play style.  Shared lists could get that player locked out of a large number of players unfairly.

Personally I have never found the global chat feature to be that helpful, not just with MF but other online games as well.  I find its just people saying random things that generally don't make much sense.  For getting into games, the auto match buttons are fine.  In depth discussion is what the forums are for.

Maybe the table creator has to click ready to start the game, but others how join the table are automatically ready.  This prevents a situation were someone other than the creator sits at the table then never clicks ready, so the game doesn't start.  Maybe in the table setup an option for the table creator to start game automatically when the max number of players has joined.

Second this.  maybe also a switchable option to let your friends see your list.

Same can be said for Prince.  I've seen it in almost every game I'm played here.  Of course once I get my subscription, that will correct itself. 

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.

It is indeed no longer in beta, but I don't blame people for thinking it is. We have a long way to go - especially on some issues that have a large impact on the games look and feel (graphics, sounds).

Comparing this product to something like hearthstone is... ambitious. Apparently they built it with an exceptionally small team of 15 people in only 6 years... well we were with 2-3 people for one year. If people still expect the same result I can understand their disappointment. The harsh truth is that a lot of money was lost with all the failed Dominion Online trials we've had over the past several years.

Nonetheless I have faith in the future... now that we can actually sell subscriptions there will also be room to pay more people to get some great graphics, and when we add them over the next couple of months I think people will be positively surprised. The emailing was problematic at the start but the gameservers themselves easily handled the load and I think we have something here we can build upon. Time will tell.

This is great! Thanks for posting this, Stef. It gives me a lot of confidence that the future of Dominion is in good hands, even if the vision isn't 100 percent actualized at the moment.

But Goko sold the license to MF when it folded.  ShuffleIt was awarded the license by RGG when the MF license expired so the Goko to MF transition is not a model for MF to ShuffleIt.

I'm glad that more people are popping up with positive feedback.  This makes me think of a customer relations training I did with my old firm.  One of the points presented was research that shows the satisfied customers on average tell 3 people about their experience, whereas unsatisfied customers tell on average 7 people.  That should give some indication that the tone of the majority of posts here may not be reflective of the overall population of users.

Many auto dealerships are independently owned and operated, and simply have an agreement to sell the cars of a given manufacturer.  In my analogy, I assume that Michaels and Stevens Creek are independant dealers and are stand-ins for MF and ShuffleIt, and Toyota represents Rio Grande Games, so I think the analogy holds.  In any case, my point is that the benefit people lost when RGG took the license away from MF is not something that ShuffleIt is responsible for, but a lot of people here are blaming ShuffleIt.

You are right about the decision to change to ShuffleIt was made by Rio Grande Games.  What I think is lost in all this discussion about whether ShuffleIt has a better or worse product, is that from a business standpoint for RGG and Donald, the agreement signed with Goko was terrible.  Donald X has stated several times that both he and RGG saw almost no revenue from Goko/MF, and that Goko sold the rights to online Dominion to MF without consulting RGG.  Regardless of the quality of the product MK had at the end, I believe (and I'm only going on second hand information and personal impressions) that RGG wanted out of the deal because it was not good for them financially.  So for the people mad that MF is gone and their one-time payment no longer entitles them to play with all the cards, they should express this directly to RGG and not ShuffleIt.

You guys are doing a great job.  Keep it up.

Under Purchasing sets, you may want to specify that the costs are per year.  We don't want anyone thinking they pay 36 euros once and have the game forever...

I also vote for remembering login as an option for a specific computer

I bought a car at Michaels Toyota in Fresno, CA years ago.  It broke down.  Now I should be able to go to Stevens Creek Toyota in San Jose and have them give me a new car since I paid for one and it no longer works.

This illustrates the flaw in your argument.  You didn't pay for the right to use Dominion for the rest of your life no matter who is providing it, you paid for the use of Goko/MK's Dominion product. That is now gone (broken down).  You didn't "already" pay for ShuffleIt's product, but they, in the interest of customer service, are giving you free use of their product for a limited time. 

We've all heard this argument before, and it stems from an emotional reaction where you feel that you should own the new product, not the legal reality.

I do agree that having game play buttons in the log area is not ideal.  I'm slowly getting use to it, but would prefer a way to get the buttons in the play area.