Inventory by Default?

My primary use (at present) of CV is a card database, not a deck builder.
It would be great if I could have the Inventory as the primary screen
rather than having to open it each time I change game systems.

It was also be great if I could set the default fields to display in each
game's inventory when newly opened - it's a bit painful having to move/hide
certain fields, and with the number of games I intend to store it's going
to be something that I will get very frustrated about...

Futher, column drag and drop, and dynamic resizing would be a real benefit...

Thakns for listening,

R.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading!
Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7...tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

[rob]

At 02:06 PM 5/1/2003 +1000, you wrote:
>My primary use (at present) of CV is a card database, not a deck builder.
>It would be great if I could have the Inventory as the primary screen
>rather than having to open it each time I change game systems.

This is already on the todo list.

>It was also be great if I could set the default fields to display in each
>game's inventory when newly opened - it's a bit painful having to move/hide
>certain fields, and with the number of games I intend to store it's going
>to be something that I will get very frustrated about...

You only need to set the columns and widths once for each game. Once you
configure the layout the way you want it, CV remembers it and restores it
every time.

Since CV is a tool that works for all games, there are inherent
difficulties with optimizing the product for a specific game. CV uses some
safe defaults and then allows the user to customize things to his personal
preferences. This customization is typically a one-time thing.
Unfortunately, it has to be done separately for each game system, since
each is unique.

If CV only worked for a single game system, this would be a non-issue for
you. You'd configure the product once for that one game and then be good to
go. The problem is that CV works for all games and you have to configure it
separately for each game. The advantage is that you don't have to learn a
completely different way of doing things for each game. There's a single
interface that's consistent and works reasonably well, and that's a big
savings that it's important not to lose sight of. :-)

To add the functionality you are requesting would entail a LOT of work. And
it would likely never work "great" for any game system, since each game
would still require tweaking for most users. In addition, all that work to
add the functionality would result in other features needing to be
postponed. Those would likely be features that you'll use over and over
again, long after you've configured things the way you want them.

When faced with a tradeoff such as this, we've always opted in favor of
adding the functionality that will be used over and over again. Why?
Because that's where the most value is realized by the user. I honestly
think this is the best approach, but I'm happy to listen to counter-arguments.

>Futher, column drag and drop, and dynamic resizing would be a real benefit...

Both are now added to the todo list...

As with the preceeding feature, though, both of those features would entail
a lot of work. Yet they would typically be used only when the user is first
configuring things the way he wants, after which they would be of minimal
ongoing value. Would you prefer these features be added or something that
you could use over and over again into the future?

That's an honest question with nothing rhetorical about it. Every release,
we need to go through the VERY long list of things we want to add to the
product and pick the set that will be added that release. There's no way to
do everything, and it's likely that many users will not see a feature they
think is important. Our goal is to pick the features that the majority of
users will find to add the most overall value. And we're not psychic, so
sometimes we pick right, and sometimes we pick wrong. :-)

Please realize also that we are a TINY company. Our development staff
consists of two people. And I spend a LARGE portion of my time dealing with
all sorts of non-development issues. So we really only have about 1.3
developers on staff. The net result is that we juggle things the best we
can and take our best guess on what to add. We rely heavily on user
feedback to guide what's most important, as evidenced by the changes made
in V1.1. But the bottom line is that we aren't Microsoft with a staff of a
dozen developers to throw at the product. So the product has to grow in
manageable, incremental steps - not huge leaps. :-)

>Thakns for listening,

And thanks for sharing your ideas for how to improve the product! Other
folks here will confirm that we DO listen and incorporate your ideas into
new releases. Unfortunately, it's an iterative evolution that simply takes
longer than we'd all prefer. :-)

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (559) 658-6995
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading!
Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7...tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

> Please realize also that we are a TINY company. Our development staff
> consists of two people. And I spend a LARGE portion of my time dealing
with
> all sorts of non-development issues. So we really only have about 1.3
> developers on staff.

Note from the marketing guy:

If you want to see this figure change, the best thing you can do is to
*evangelize the product*. Part of the reason we're tiny is that we can't
afford any more people. The more sales we get, the better off the company
is, and therefore the better off Card Vault will be.

Recent data have shown that awareness of Card Vault is still very low. So
please, don't just use the program on your own. Get your store to carry it.
Get your friends and favorite opponents to download it and try it out (both
the regular program and the free Deck Viewer). Email the CV demo exe file to
folks you know who might be interested. Peer sales are very effective.

And thanks for your support.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/O10svD/Me7...tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

At 11:33 AM 2/05/2003, you wrote:

> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 22:37:03 -0700
> From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
>
> >It would be great if I could have the Inventory as the primary screen
> >rather than having to open it each time I change game systems.
>
>This is already on the todo list.



> >It was also be great if I could set the default fields to display in each
> >game's inventory when newly opened - it's a bit painful having to move/hide
> >certain fields, and with the number of games I intend to store it's going
> >to be something that I will get very frustrated about...
>
>You only need to set the columns and widths once for each game. Once you
>configure the layout the way you want it, CV remembers it and restores it
>every time.

I realise this, but if I achieve my (insane) goal of collecting all 130+
CCG in existence (we'll ignore figurines for now that that's a lotta
work for me!

>Since CV is a tool that works for all games, there are inherent
>difficulties with optimizing the product for a specific game. CV uses some
>safe defaults and then allows the user to customize things to his personal
>preferences. This customization is typically a one-time thing.
>Unfortunately, it has to be done separately for each game system, since
>each is unique.

What I'm proposing is being able to choose my own set of "safe defaults" as
a starting
point for each game, because some of those in the defaults now are
currently "junk" to me, and not having Rarity in the defaults is a puzzling
omission (okay, I'm talking the Inventory
system, but that's my current focus, and building decks for all my games is
a pipe dream anyway )))

>To add the functionality you are requesting would entail a LOT of work. And
>it would likely never work "great" for any game system, since each game
>would still require tweaking for most users. In addition, all that work to

Yes, but that's always going to be the case.

>When faced with a tradeoff such as this, we've always opted in favor of
>adding the functionality that will be used over and over again. Why?
>Because that's where the most value is realized by the user. I honestly
>think this is the best approach, but I'm happy to listen to counter-arguments.

Nope, I do agree with you - later. But for now I want stuff that assists me
during setup because that's where I'm at with CV )))))

> >Futher, column drag and drop, and dynamic resizing would be a real
> benefit...
>
>Both are now added to the todo list...

))))))))))))

>As with the preceeding feature, though, both of those features would entail
>a lot of work. Yet they would typically be used only when the user is first
>configuring things the way he wants, after which they would be of minimal
>ongoing value. Would you prefer these features be added or something that
>you could use over and over again into the future?

Actually, I think you're wrong about the usage of those features. At the
moment people are setting their inventories up and probably have little use
for the buy/trade and price columns. As time goes on, and there are more
sites supporting CV and data interchange these previously "useless" fields
will become useful and important, necessitating a change in the columns
position, visibility, and size...

>Please realize also that we are a TINY company. Our development staff
>consists of two people. And I spend a LARGE portion of my time dealing with
>all sorts of non-development issues. So we really only have about 1.3
>developers on staff. The net result is that we juggle things the best we
>can and take our best guess on what to add. We rely heavily on user
>feedback to guide what's most important, as evidenced by the changes made
>in V1.1. But the bottom line is that we aren't Microsoft with a staff of a
>dozen developers to throw at the product. So the product has to grow in
>manageable, incremental steps - not huge leaps. :-)

Your company is EXACTLY like mine - 2 staff doing everything. We have the same
issues with managing User expections, without the problem of having users who
actually know what they want

>And thanks for sharing your ideas for how to improve the product! Other
>folks here will confirm that we DO listen and incorporate your ideas into
>new releases. Unfortunately, it's an iterative evolution that simply takes
>longer than we'd all prefer. :-)

Wish I could offer to help mod/maintain, but I really ought to look after
the paying work here first

R.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading!
Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7...tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

[rob]

At 01:06 PM 5/2/2003 +1000, you wrote:
> >You only need to set the columns and widths once for each game. Once you
> >configure the layout the way you want it, CV remembers it and restores it
> >every time.
>
>I realise this, but if I achieve my (insane) goal of collecting all 130+
>CCG in existence (we'll ignore figurines for now that that's a lotta
>work for me!

Yikes! The survey we ran with the Christmas Give-Away indicated that the
vast majority of CV users plays about 4 different games. For 4 games,
re-configuring each game isn't that big of a deal. Now that you put things
in perspective, I can understand why you consider this to be important
functionality. :-)

>What I'm proposing is being able to choose my own set of "safe defaults" as
>a starting
>point for each game, because some of those in the defaults now are
>currently "junk" to me, and not having Rarity in the defaults is a puzzling
>omission (okay, I'm talking the Inventory
>system, but that's my current focus, and building decks for all my games is
>a pipe dream anyway )))

Understood. It's been added to the todo list.

As for the Rarity being omitted, the rarity is not a core tag group that is
required for every game. CV can only assume that the core tag groups exist,
since a given author might choose to omit a given group or include it with
a different name. So the default View is built only out of core groups that
are guaranteed to exist in every set of data files. This is one of those
little niggly details that impacts a generic product that has to adapt to
every game system.

> >To add the functionality you are requesting would entail a LOT of work. And
> >it would likely never work "great" for any game system, since each game
> >would still require tweaking for most users. In addition, all that work to
>
>Yes, but that's always going to be the case.

Agreed. That's simply why the value in adding the ability to customize the
default View is of diminished value. The user is still going to have to
tweak things further. And for the typical user who only plays four games,
customizing the default View and then having to refine it further for each
game offers little extra value over fully configuring each game. It's not
until a user has to contend with a LONG list of games, such as in your
case, that the value surfaces. :-)

> >As with the preceeding feature, though, both of those features would entail
> >a lot of work. Yet they would typically be used only when the user is first
> >configuring things the way he wants, after which they would be of minimal
> >ongoing value. Would you prefer these features be added or something that
> >you could use over and over again into the future?
>
>Actually, I think you're wrong about the usage of those features. At the
>moment people are setting their inventories up and probably have little use
>for the buy/trade and price columns. As time goes on, and there are more
>sites supporting CV and data interchange these previously "useless" fields
>will become useful and important, necessitating a change in the columns
>position, visibility, and size...

Valid points.

> >Please realize also that we are a TINY company. Our development staff
> >consists of two people. And I spend a LARGE portion of my time dealing with
> >all sorts of non-development issues. So we really only have about 1.3
> >developers on staff. The net result is that we juggle things the best we
> >can and take our best guess on what to add. We rely heavily on user
> >feedback to guide what's most important, as evidenced by the changes made
> >in V1.1. But the bottom line is that we aren't Microsoft with a staff of a
> >dozen developers to throw at the product. So the product has to grow in
> >manageable, incremental steps - not huge leaps. :-)
>
>Your company is EXACTLY like mine - 2 staff doing everything. We have the same
>issues with managing User expections, without the problem of having users who
>actually know what they want

Brothers in arms!!! :->

> >And thanks for sharing your ideas for how to improve the product! Other
> >folks here will confirm that we DO listen and incorporate your ideas into
> >new releases. Unfortunately, it's an iterative evolution that simply takes
> >longer than we'd all prefer. :-)
>
>Wish I could offer to help mod/maintain, but I really ought to look after
>the paying work here first

Wholly understood. :->

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (559) 658-6995
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for Trying!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/KXUxcA/fNt...tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

--- Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com> wrote:
> As for the Rarity being omitted, the rarity is not a core tag group that is
> required for every game. CV can only assume that the core tag groups exist,
> since a given author might choose to omit a given group or include it with
> a different name. So the default View is built only out of core groups that
> are guaranteed to exist in every set of data files. This is one of those
> little niggly details that impacts a generic product that has to adapt to
> every game system.

Rarity could almost be a "required" group. Most games have it, and those that
do not just have a flat rarity scheme where any card has the same rarity, but
it does have a rarity



=====
---

Kuni Tetsu
Clan War rules guy
Moderator of ClanWar-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Rent DVDs Online - Over 14,500 titles.
No Late Fees & Free Shipping.
Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/YoVfrB/XP....tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

[rob]

Agreed. But making it a required group retroactively would require that it
named in a standard way. That would in turn cause the data files for a few
game systems to cease working due to slight variations. And that would be a
"bad thing" to do right now. :-)

In hindsight, I agree that rarity probably SHOULD have been required. As
should a few others that have been pointed out here. But changing that
would entail coordinating the synchronization of all data files. Since many
of the data files are not maintained directly by us, that introduces the
risk that one or more games would become broken for a period of time. And
that would be bad. So it's not a change that can be made lightly....

Consequently, it's a change that I'm reluctant to make at the present
moment....

-Rob

At 03:22 PM 5/2/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>Rarity could almost be a "required" group. Most games have it, and those that
>do not just have a flat rarity scheme where any card has the same rarity, but
>it does have a rarity


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (559) 658-6995
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Rent DVDs from home.
Over 14,500 titles. Free Shipping
& No Late Fees. Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BVVfoB/hP....tFAA/WuQolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->