FG has great functionality, expandability, and RPG support, but a clunky and dated UI

[deer_buster]

As a long time owner/user of FG, I will say that I agree with the original poster. There are a great many things to love about FG. I'm super pumped that they are finally taking a step forward from the FG classic client, but in my mind it doesn't do enough to tackle the real UI/UX issues that exist.

Also, LUA is fine for a scripting language...many gaming platforms use it (although they don't limit LUA as much as FG, which allows for some very creative and useful mods in games), but the clunky way that you have to use/design the XML templates is very outdated and not intuitive or easy to figure out for most, and I hate doing it. I do hope that at some point we can get HTML templates (or something more modern by the time they get to it) to coexist or replace XML. JSON data files and HTML templates is probably where I would go if it were to happen now, but who knows what the future holds.

[similarly]

As a long time owner/user of FG, I will say that I agree with the original poster. There are a great many things to love about FG. I'm super pumped that they are finally taking a step forward from the FG classic client, but in my mind it doesn't do enough to tackle the real UI/UX issues that exist.

Also, LUA is fine for a scripting language...many gaming platforms use it (although they don't limit LUA as much as FG, which allows for some very creative and useful mods in games), but the clunky way that you have to use/design the XML templates is very outdated and not intuitive or easy to figure out for most, and I hate doing it. I do hope that at some point we can get HTML templates (or something more modern by the time they get to it) to coexist or replace XML. JSON data files and HTML templates is probably where I would go if it were to happen now, but who knows what the future holds.

Maybe you could formally suggest it as a feature? https://fg2app.idea.informer.com/

[deer_buster]

Maybe you could formally suggest it as a feature? https://fg2app.idea.informer.com/

I've already up-voted this one, which would eliminate my complaint about developing content. It's been languishing since 2013 however, even though it is #5 on the list.

[LordEntrails]

I've already up-voted this one, which would eliminate my complaint about developing content. It's been languishing since 2013 however, even though it is #5 on the list.

And yet the crowd funding effort for that one failed miserably, my understanding. Perhaps a new crowd funding effort for it might succeed now?

[deer_buster]

And yet the crowd funding effort for that one failed miserably, my understanding. Perhaps a new crowd funding effort for it might succeed now?

So, you're saying that Feature Requests have to be crowd funded or they are ignored (I know that's not what you are saying, or your point)? If that is something that Smiteworks wants to crowd fund/outsource, then maybe they should be the ones sourcing the crowd funding effort (ala FGU), then it might grow legs a bit more. If content developers had something like that available to them, the amount of content could skyrocket as the barrier to entry would be a whole hell of a lot lower.

[deer_buster]

P.S. if something like that was created that not only could produce rulesets, but also extensions and modules for existing rulesets, I'd easily pledge $25-50.

[LordEntrails]

No, that's not what I'm saying. My understanding is that crowdfund attempt was not done by SmiteWorks.

My point is that this comes up from time to time, but those that want it don't realize 2 things;
1) It is incredible difficult to do. If a program is not architected originally to allow this type of API/UI/Interaction, adding one at a later date takes thousands of developer hours (like on the scale of FGU, with a lot higher risk). Which means a cost similar to FGU, and one that would only be of valuable to a small set of community developers (say less than 10%). So, rather than $40-150 per user, multiple that by an order of magnitude. As exhibited by your own statement, such a tool is not worth that much to you.
2) There's just not enough support to make such an investment a good business decision. It's an awesome idea, I would love it too. It would grow the FG community with a huge leap, but only once/short term. Their is a very finite number of rulesystems and users of those rulesystems. And the growth of new rulesystems (in the RPG market) probably would never sustain such a tool. Once the top 50? systems had rulesets, how many more would would emerge that would be financially viable? Maybe 1-2 per year?

Remember, even looking at all the different usage statistics, something like 95% of roleplayers use the top ~10 or so systems. (Number pulled out of my faulty memory, but you get the idea, and exact numbers don't really matter to make the point). And most of those systems already have FG rulesystems.

[deer_buster]

I knew that wasn't what you were saying or your point (even said so).

Hmm, seems like the "kickstarter", or whatever it was...I don't recognize the URL....was a significant order of magnitude less than FGU in goal....I may be wrong, those Euro number and Euro formatting throw me sometimes. I think it said the goal was 14,000 Euros, of which only 2,940 were pledged. Seems more doable and probably would have been if run on a more legitimate (in my mind) kickstarter page and advertised at least as well as FGU was.

And really, this tool, to be useful, would really only need to give us a WYSIWYG for the windows...the lua development is child's play in comparison. YMMV. I can't see how THAT could be so tremendously expensive.

[LordEntrails]

*shrug* I think that was before KS became the primary crowdfunding place for RPGs. But as I said, it's not about the actual numbers, but rather the relative. It would be a niche tool used by a small part of the community, with a limited life span.

I would be happy if I was wrong, and it got made, I just don't think SW ever will as I don't think it would make business sense for them. Again, would be happy to be wrong

[deer_buster]

It might be a niche tool, and it might not. Like I said it doesn't actually have to be a complete ruleset development toolkit to be useful. Some really creative people out there could WYSIWYG design charactersheets, popups, etc. export them to an XML and then others could then implement and automate. I dunno about the other content developers, but my "creative" side was overwritten by my logical side at birth. Design is NOT my forte. If someone say, created an aesthetically pleasing and thoughtfully laid out charactersheet for Starfinder, I would be happy to put the work in to implement it, but creating that XML layout is NOT something I like doing, at all. I have to remember what does what, where this comes from and where that comes from, and so on. I'd much rather focus on the logic.

Anyway, enough banter about it. I'm sure others have thoughts about what they like/dislike