Since it's just come up - when a review is a new featured item, the review score is missing from the homepage. Even if it's deliberate, it is missing.
tdous's forum posts
If you have specific feedback put it in the feedback thread rather than giving them two places to have to trawl for comments. This is all entirely unhelpful. https://www.giantbomb.com/forums/general-discussion-30/giant-bomb-new-site-feedback-1849340/
Sorry, one more thing, as I'd somehow managed avoid looking at the homepage itself enough yet. My personal priorities for a GB homepage, highest to lowest, are:
- Latest videos/podcasts. Most of the old site's home page was a list of the new shit.
- Latest videos/podcasts. Yes, again. This is 90% of it for me. I open the site - what's new?
- That Upcoming list, because it's sometimes useful.
- Maybe... maybe"Continue Watching", if it's possible to easily remove items (it's very annoying on YouTube as you can't just clear an item or the whole list without manually skipping each one to the end if, say, a video wasn't fun enough to warrant continuing), and if it's only things you've actually started - the current list seems to include things I know I've not bothered to watch yet. I'd also put this far down the page after my 278 items of latest content.
- Literally any of the rest of what's currently there including the giant "thanks for being premium" image that feels like it's there to fill a space of precisely that size. I agree with someone else that "Popular Videos" is of little interest to me, but I guess if an old video somehow went viral it could be vaguely interesting. So overall that gives "Latest" and lots of it, "Upcoming" in there somewhere, genuine and easily editable "Continue Watching" if appriopriate, "Popular Videos", other.
My main point is right now I have one big "hero" item, 3 other recent things which feels like there's less going on. Way down the page a few more Latest things are there in a scroller but that doesn't do it for me, either in terms of reflecting the output, or in its location on the page.
Continued love and support to the devs.
Honestly, I don't think that is as minor a thing as you think. The terminology you establish for your content can have a dramatic effect on the usability of a site. Not that "where when and how to people look and click" type of physical usability people tend to think of, but cognitive usability - peoples' ability to quickly and easily understand what they're seeing and to set their expectations of how they should be able to interact with it. I've seen a lot of sites start with a whiteboard of content type definitions and there always ends up with notable, noticeable outliers but so much of GB's content is, while of a type, not strictly part of a series so being too rigid with the show/episode label could be problematic. Quick Look as an episode is jarring to familiar visitors, potentially confusing to new users.
I second some of the sentiment of a, for want of a better word, "bloated" or perhaps inflated mobile layout on a desktop PC. Less visible at one time gives a sense of having to find the content rather than it being presented, though for me this is mainly an overall size issue, and in general I don't mind the new layout.
Lastly, and I've said this before, personally I miss the video "byline" on all the video grid/list views, ie. who posted it. The synopsis is, I suppose, less important though they were sometimes entertaining in themselves, but especially while I'm talking about fitting more on screen, maybe that's the trade-off. But knowing the site's personalities, seeing who posted a video certainly gives me a shorthand sense of who's likely to be in it, the tone, how much I personally am likely to enjoy it... and so was often how I'd prioritize what to watch first.
Chin up, devs, I know the struggle. You'll get there.
I'm sorry to be negative right out of the gate, but i feel like I've set my screen resolution to low when viewing the beta redesign. Everything is huge and takes up too much space.
Also I'm a Netflix subscriber, but I hate their layout and i hope not too much is copied.. I noticed the category feeds ("latest" "popular" etc) are not clickable categories. I would hate the Netflix like design a lot less if they were something I could navigate to a full page view rather then swiping through 4 at a time.. uhg.. not a fan.. sorry :(
I feel like navigating is slower in general, I like the old text drop downs, they are fast and clear. Navigating through multiple pages to find shows then scrolling through 3 or more screens with giant thumbnails rather then clear text feels slower and clumsier. Not a deal breaker but also not an improvement in my opinion.
I'm of the same mind as an almost 100% desktop user. I have this problem in general as web design has trended in the direction of accessibility (a good thing) it's also tended, along with increasing resolutions, to visually "inflate" to fill the space as opposed to fitting any more on screen. I know the prevailing wisdom is less... to simplify, but some people think better with portioned info, scrolling between portions, others consume more easily presented with as much as possible in one go. In a similar vein to the old site's light/dark option, if there was an overall site zoom option between two states, that'd be nice. Obviously I know browsers can all zoom these days, but sites don't always respond well. The "Videos > Shows" list with it's huge thumbnails is prime example where I had to check up and down 4 times to see whether Endurance Run was missing (it is, assuming that's what would be considered a "show", and if not, what? EDIT: oh, sorry... Archived Show? Though there's only Persona 4 - just a reduced beta dataset?), or if I'd simply missed it. Using the browser zoom I can get out 3 steps and have it still be usable, though the fixed max width means I don't gain anything horizontally doing that.
Having an option of a fixed, "zoomed out" site would give more room for things like the "posted" by line and synopsis which is currently missing from video lists. It's nice to know if it's something I'm more likely to want to watch ahead of time based on this info.
In general, great job so far, I know from experience how hard this all is. I haven't played with it much yet so these are initial impressions.
Seems good now. Assume there was an update. Thanks to whoever for whatever work was done :)
By breaks it I mean this...
Two ways to recreate it:
One is if the video is already playing, switch to Fill Browser mode and try to move the playhead (or whatever it's called) - the video returns to what looks like its regular size, the site behind it hidden, and the video controls missing, as shown. The video can still be paused by clicking it.
The other is after the page loads, before initially clicking the play icon to trigger the player, set it to Fill Browser first then hit play - the same thing immediately happens, maybe suggesting it's not so much the slider as starting playback from any new position in Fill Browser mode.
That's with the browser window not maximized. If the browser window is maximized at the time it does the same sort of thing, but like this...
Unmaximizing the window returns it to the size shown in the first image.
- Windows 10 64-bit
- Screenshots taken in Firefox 56.0.2 64-bit and Vivaldi 1.12.955.48 (stable) 32-bit.
- No real extensions to speak off... Last Pass, an ad-blocker I disabled on GB in Vivaldi only and a Pop-up Blocker in FF, also disabled.
No console errors at the time it occurs. I feel like it's only been happening in the last day or two, but can't be sure.
More of a feature request I guess, but if I move the mouse down to the video player to pause, or continue, only to have the main nav instantly pop-up on hover leading to me clicking away to another page one more time, I'll actually, literally explode.
All it'll take is a short, almost imperceptible delay, say 300-500ms, between the hover event and the menu popping over to catch 90% of these actions and most people won't notice the difference.
These already skilled, talented people, who apparently (I don't know them at all) will fit in quickly and well, became available when GB was hiring. Whatever checklists and quotas you may want the hiring process, it would have been madness not to take the opportunity, versus untested recruits for the sake of an oversimplified, internet forum definition of "diversity". Why not just view this as shoring up the ship? Even if you're concerned about similarities to current team members, an actually believe they won't have their own things to offer, it just means GB can produce more of the content it has been, with familiar personalities giving the space Jeff's wanted to do more "crazy stuff", whatever that might be.
Also is the hiring process ever really over? Now these obvious and successfully opportunistic hires are done, maybe they can look for people with more of a varied set of backgrounds and viewpoints, if they feel the need. For me, it's about games and making me laugh and as long as one or the other, or often both of those things are taken care of it doesn't bother me at all.
I wish them both the best of luck and look forward to seeing where the site goes.