This proposal aims to get feedback from LG and the community on the prioritization of UX improvements and implementation of a mobile-first approach to development, over the launch of Tribes.
Need for UX improvements
Mobile-first approach
It would be good to
understand from LG what effort and timeline would be associated with both of the above necessities. I believe there is broad consensus on the need to conduct improvements in the above-mentioned areas.
Get the opinion and suggested improvements from the community so this can be moved to a proposal as soon as possible.
Motivation
It is my conviction that without the implementation of UX improvements and a mobile-first approach any marketing or onboarding initiatives will be an uphill battle. These fundamental issues need to be fixed to create the basis for DAU growth.
Without it, new features that get released and any hype (when it is eventually there) won’t be as effective as there would be too many break-off points when onboarding new users. A clear path to 30-day retention needs to be wrought, with the listed initiatives first steps on this road.
Details
Need for UX improvements
removal of the lock-in / lock-out and stash-in / stash-out block confirmations
instead, move to a cooldown model, where assets are locked for a certain time AFTER transfer
farming – get a single dashboard per land in which all actions are possible, with separate tabs for the different activities (farming, crafting, breeding, gathering)
create an in-game interactive guide. An idea could be to have an avatar of sorts guide you through the game – perhaps this could be one of the little star or other guys until something better is found?
Fix the transaction presets – perhaps an automated update process can be implemented?
Mobile-first approach
As the CU code is built on Unity, there is no real impediment to publish games on mobile. There have been significant changes in the market, and it would be crazy for LG not to use their mobile expertise to build a mobile version of ALL game aspects, including the farm sim.
Going forward, all game loops should have a focus on mobile (including SC – but this can be done gradually)
The competition is doing this, if CU does not, we won’t be able to grow and thrive
Any meaningful discussion can only be started when timelines or effort estimates can be made. I hope LG can provide a separate estimate for the above topics, including any additional cost and time required – and the effect on existing developments (tribes, specifically).
Conclusion
Improvements to UX are a core issue and it’s clear any marketing effort will fail if a large percentage of new users break-off after 10 seconds. The path to 30-day retention requires a solid foundation, which the measures described here will provide.
Mobile is a game-changer, the additional market size and user base that can be addressed is significant, with mobile users so much more inclined to spend than anyone on a PC. With the roadblocks for web3 on web-stores starting to disappear and many competitors offering an APK, now is the time to make the pivot.
Seems like no brainer to me. I think tribes, gems and even shadowcorn loops can wait until these issues are cleared. We really do need a mobile app especially wen other projects are launching their games on app stores. Our game doesn’t even run on mobile smoothly. Need to fix that ASAP.
On the UX improvements: We need to see how the game fully behaves with 2.3 and 2.4. We released 2.3 today, let’s see what 2.4 does.
On pivoting to mobile: It’s not that we don’t want to go mobile. It’s not clear that the mobile app stores will even list our application. Google’s stance has softened but isn’t clear. The chance of getting listed in the Apple App Store is even much slower. It’s not as easy as coming to the store with an application and getting immediate approval if you’re using crypto in the game.
On correcting misinformation on new player retention: Week 1 retention of new players is not the problem. In fact, it has increased from 77% to 83%. The recent data shows otherwise and would even argue that 77% is still good. While the presented assumption may be true in 2022, the data does not support this assumption.
The good news:
2.4 is going out next. Lots of good things to expect from there.
Mitch opened a suggestion channel for the community to submit their web3 gaming platform listing suggestions. Until the app stores stance on web3 gaming changes, we’ll do well listing on web3 gaming platforms for now.
Crypto Unicorns is not just about the main game. While the main game may not be on mobile, we do have the second-party games on mobile. There are other plans around this so let’s wait and see what happens.
I don’t play mobile games (due to health issues) so need the browser option, but it’s obvious to me that mobile is essential if we are to reach the masses with CUs arcade of 2nd party games.
As for the app stores, if our game is popular enough and is getting app downloads via the main website hub, then won’t the app stores come knocking at LGs door coz they’ll want a piece of the pie @lgManicUnicorn gNan?
Thank you for the response Nanessa. If possible, It would be good to get some more detail around the points you mention.
UX improvements: there’s no mention of the specific points I listed in my initial post. I saw kora post that the current transaction pre-sets have still not been adjusted and propose tx with way too low priority fee. Why should the points raised in my initial post not be immediately addressed? Are these going to be addressed with the 2.4 release? If not, I don’t see the point in waiting and seeing - this is what we’ve been doing for the past year and this proposal aims to rectify priorities, so I find it somewhat strange the position of the team is “wait and see” again, without providing details of what will be included in 2.4 and whether the issues raised will be addressed or not.
mobile - this needs to happen, and it needs to happen fast. It’s rare the community is aligned on something, but from what I’ve been seeing and discussing, pretty much everyone seems to agree with this. Again, it’s not about the app store, it’s about releasing APK first. In addition @asaid mentioned another workaround above.
thank you for this. Would it be possible to provide some up-to-date statistics? Also, it would be great if you can explain how you figure out whether a “new” wallet is actually a new player or an old player expanding. I imagine there are myriad ways to do this, so would like to understand your approach.
Overall, I feel the most important question for the LG team has not been asnwered: what would the timeline to implement the proposed changes be, and what would be the impact on ongoing development? LgJeff provided an initial estimate of ca 6 weeks for the UX topics raised above. It would be great if you can formalize this and add a high-level effort estimate for the mobile pivot before moving this idea to a proposal, so the DAO will ultimately be able to vote in an informed manner. Also, it seems I have to change this idea into a proposal in order to get a decent impact report, as the above response does not qualify.
In addition, my UX recommendation is to add “favorite recipe tab” for crafting recipe in workshop. It should work same as how “favorite seeds tab” work for planting.
My concern on this on this is once we have 2.4. we might even re-quote it let’s wait for 2.4 release and see what 2.5 does. until we never get to do it.
In my discussion with your team here in AMA’s and random discord convos it seems that it says other things.
Why not we start with just APK first and not with google play and ios stores?. if we have them available, at least people can start using it. regardless even if its in the stores or not. login systems will come soon and honestly the game seems to has its own limits in Browser instead of just having it on its own mobile applications. this feature has been requested for so many years and has been denied so much time stating “to be considered in the future”. when is that going to start?
Having an APK would even put this game in a mode of “ease of convenience” in usage. and you’ll have more people using the mobile app [specially when you have the e-mail login] instead of people working on a “temporary workaround” that uses Brave or Opera or some browser that is susceptible to wallet hacks and then you’ll deal with other issues after. those numbers would have been much better if we would have another means to access the game.
Maybe @RXIS can change the proposal that after 2.4 this would be a direction that we need to take .
We get that, but like you said this is the main game. wouldn’t it be better if the main game is accessible everywhere? 2nd party games can also be in that front that’s nothing wrong with that . but at least your access to the MAIN GAME is available with mode of convenience.
I really don’t understand why this hasn’t been done for years. I hope this proposal pass.
I really don’t understand why this hasn’t been done for years. I hope this proposal pass.
I don’t think this will pass given the team’s stance. This is likely be a No vote from us. I would still hold that we wait for 2.4 and the true deltas. Kiwi browser is there and accessible to those who use mobile. I think that’s a good alternative.
That’s what I actually said. why do users have to use these Kiwi Browsers / Other browsers just to play the main game on mobile? Why do they had to resort themselves to using other methods when there are safer methods.
by your statement does it mean LG is supporting the use of Kiwi Browsers?. if there are any hack cases because a user uses Kiwi browsers would LG be liable to it? . no right?
A lot of people don’t realize these “small changes” can also mean significant on untapped users.
I don’t see why its a “No” when LG doesn’t always present data on what their decisions are.
From our end, what we don’t understand is why the Kiwi browser does not suffice. Are you able to provide an explanation regarding that? Given that an existing solution is out there, why should resources be allocated to this?
While Kiwi Browser works. there are still several steps for users to set it up.
You also need to expose your Seed Phrase if you want to import or use your own wallet.
If Kiwi browser had some late updates on CVE since they are not mainstream browsers you could expose your assets on risk you wouldn’t want in the first place.
That doesn’t even cater the fact that if a user is not technical they would definitely not set this up. or Lazy, or people who just dont have time to deal with so much technical blah blah .
Back then there was also some talks that only XXX version of Kiwi browser will work on crypto unicorns.
If a new user wants to jump on your platform. do you expect them to have Kiwi browser setup in their mobile phones with their seed phrases in there?
Comparison to having an APK that they can download here in discord and use and one go. like axie back then it’s easier for users to setup. easier to on-board players.
You’ll have e-mail login systems soon. this will greatly support that movement.
Compare the Following?
Using Kiwi Browser Basic Steps :
Download Kiwi Browser.
Install
If it doesn’t work make sure to find the right version of Kiwi Browser and go back to the site and check the older releases.
You may also download different Kiwi browsers because some of them may not be compatible with your mobile device.
there is a risk of downloading an Infected Kiwi Browser. if you got that GG!
Download Meta Mask.
Import your Metamask either its seed phrase or your import Key.
Login and Sign
If you have a problem LG will not be liable to this and if you get hacked there are not ways for us to do anything.
Use an APK
Download the APK from your website.
Install
If it doesn’t work make sure you’re allowing APK’s to be installed in your Phone.
Login ad Sign.
No Seed Phrase or Import Keys Exposed.
What are the chances that users have their meta mask app already installed in their mobile phone vs them having to download a specific kiwi browser with the metamask there along with their Seedphrase or Wallet imported inside?
What are the chances that users will really read thru even if you put a guide to use a Kiwi browser for a game compared to just having to get 1 APK from CU?
Did you also know that on Axie days, Kiwi Browsers got attacked and got some users asset taken from them? not going to dive further into this.
There are so many relative risk and loop holes here
Also like mentioned it can be after 2.4 like you said. but as also like before. CU has pushed this narrative so many times before even in AMA’s, so its more likely you guys will not follow thru to start working on this for 2.5.
What about IOS support?
We can start the ball rolling by started the APK first in Android. and to a “Beta Test opening” for IOS for those who wants to play.
Statistics shows that there are 70.79% of users are using android compared to IOS with 28.44% . from 2009 to Q2 of 2023
Clan Leaderboard scores also dictates that we only have around 1600 active wallets who are playing in Clans and that could just be at max count right now and we could have less than 455 users who are using IOS which is still inside that 1000 Cap for Apple Test Flight. I’m not even talking about the whales and the users that has double or multiple wallets.
Is this enough data? . since you said LG’s stance is No.
Thanks for sharing, Keizer. As you have mentioned, the Kiwi browser works. This game was made to be web-based game and those who might wish to play on mobile may look to available alternatives. As it happens, Kiwi browser works. We’ll continue working on the user experience for the intended platform (PC). As our position on this is final, it’ll be hard to proceed with this proposal. Appreciate all the discussions here so far and respect that everyone has the interest of the community in mind as they see from their personal perspective.
Edit: Apologies if you had thought answering my question will change our perspective. That was not the intention.
and like mentioned “kiwi browser works” doesn’t also equate to it being convenient to use . if the real intention is to really increase the user growth then wouldn’t this be a better alternative?
This web-based game also was coded in unity and that the developers also already said before that it can be done.
So yes it is really confusing to why LG’s stance is like this. I don’t want to back you guys up on a wall but this is really saying something.
and based on this discussion it seems also that LG is not open for any discussion about this and will never do this. there are several thoughts about this atm but i guess ill leave this as to this…
still looking forward for LG to look at this in the future. we already lost a lot of opportunity. and that these are those base requirements we should also start providing if we really want to provide ease of convenience.
This is correct. This is a hard no for us due to the reasons I indicated above. I apologize if my initial phrasing has been vague. I’ve stated our position earlier in the first response I made and apologize if I didn’t make it clear from the very start.
Thanks for the time and I apologize for dragging this too long.
I’d also like to take this opportunity to provide a slight course correction on how we envisioned this DAO:
Yes, the DAO has the right to control direction of the game but
No, it does not have the right to volunteer its members’ skills and contributions without that member’s consent
Instead of making LG do things that are not in the plan of LG, it would be better for builders within this DAO to act on their ideas by coming forward to the DAO with proposals.
The idea has always been for the CU DAO to be a place where builders can come in and build on top of what LG built. Things LG are not doing are perfect developer opportunities.
You guys totally contradict with yourself. What kind of circus is this DAO. Stop undermining the community and their votes otherwise you’re killing this project.
If you need more time. We can wait till 2.4 or even 2.5 or 2.6. but stop dictating us and making our votes and participation in governance pointless.
Thanks for sharing this. This is perfect. This perfectly proves my point on the first post about waiting for 2.4 and true deltas. When Aron mentioned 2.3, it also was referring to the true delta iirc. It didn’t make the 2.3 but it’s expected to make 2.4. This speaks of how much confidence we want to put into it which is why my statement is also:
