Viewpoint How roleplaying is perceived in relation to presentation (bad title)

[WhiskeyMarten]

I apologise for the bad title, wanted to get this thread up quickly while the idea was in my head.

Just a general thread because I'm curious.

When you're looking for a roleplay, how much do you think the presentation of a thread influence your judgement of it?

Of course there's the obvious things like spelling, grammar, and general layout of the text (like are the paragraphs good sizes, is the text too small/big, etc).

But then you get to more advanced bbcode than just bolding or changing text sizes, and suddenly theres a lot more to take in. Variety of colours and fonts, images, all these tabs and things to scroll through. There's a lot more to offer in expressing the aesthetics and themes of a roleplay... but how important is it to you?

Does a plain looking interest check dissuade you from looking further? Perhaps you prefer simplicity in presentation over the flashiness of complex bbcode? Or maybe it doesn't matter to you. Let me know!

I also wonder if there's ever any bias in the roleplays themselves, if people are more likely to perceive uncoded posts different compared to heavily coded posts. If you have an opinion on this I'd love to hear but I imagine most will say that they only judge based on the content of the post (and things like spelling and grammar that aren't affected by code).

 

[Ayama]

I'm definitely partial to coded posts, but what matters most is if the overall aesthetic is appealing to my preferences. So I would take minimal coding that I think works aesthetically over more involved coding that is too tiny or cluttered or all over the place, if that makes sense.

 

[Idea]

The coding on a roleplay doesn't have a big effect on my judgement of the contents, but it does make me more likely to want to read them. It's same reason why until recently my interest checks had in the bonus/brownie points section having an anime profile pic, because it feels better to look at something that is nicer to look at. Some eye candy can help convey a nicer initial impression and wanting to look at it helps to get through reading something which I may less or almost no initial investment in. Also, while it's not so much the case now that 9/10 coded posts seem to have been code taken from someone else, there was a time when most coded posts I saw where made by the people themselves, so in that sense they showed a level of effort and commitment at least in that initial stage. Though, again, now that it's basically all borrowed I don't think that thought holds.

One more thing that comes to mind, is that I am someone who likes to add code to my posts. I may not have the best skills out there, but I still like to try to make something fitting or even creative for my characters, both in character sheets and IC posts. If the interest check is coded that shows that at the very least the GM is not one of those types that will be against me coding as a matter of principle, nor otherwise think less of me for using something more visually complex than small text edits (AKA more than tabs, bolding, italics...).

Like I mentioned at the start however, while a code might help capture and retain my attention, and an initial better impression is something which primes one to be more open to what follows, it doesn't really influence my brain criteria for what roleplays to take on. These are usually based on the compatibility of the logistical details - post requirements usually being the main one - and the stimulation of my imagination. Admittedly there was a point where those visuals had more of an influence than it does now, but that was also a time when I could afford to be more experimental and less careful about not biting off more than I can chew, compared to now.

 

[GrumpySwallow]

I don't care about coding, and I refuse to use it for my posts. I don't have any problems with people who do use them, but I believe such things should be optional. I don't need them to enjoy RP. The trend of requiring decorated posts for RP is what drove me away from Gaia Online back around 2013 and it isn't until recently that I've decided to give forum RP another go. I'm a believer that RPs should be simple and easy to join. Just give me an interesting setting and story hook; that's all I need! Coding and images are just extra unnecessary work for me.

 

[A Sparkling Zombie]

First and foremost, I care about the accessibility of the content. I'll consider an unstyled, plaintext interest check a hundred times more than one that uses an unfriendly format.

People have said it in other threads and I agree: if the format is not accessible via all devices, please consider adding a plaintext version below it. It's a godsend and can attract more players.

And to be clear, it's not just mobile devices that someone needs to consider; laptops can be impacted, too, when there aren't available scrollbars and the user lacks a mouse with a scroll wheel, or the trackpad equivalent.

Honestly, if a thread has a plaintext version, chances are I'm looking there instead of at the window dressing, because if I'm honest, I feel like it's often a more comfortable user experienced compared to a number of available codes. I understand that styling tabbed formats requires jumping through hoops, but still, one thing I wish more BBCoders understood is that UX is crucial, more so than the UI. Flashy styles don't mean much if users can't intuit how to navigate the format, or if they have to guess which tabs contain which information, or if it limits the devices that users can access the content through.

In general, I'm not a user who treats browsing the recruitment threads like a stroll through the park. Subconsciously, I might appreciate the visual elements, but I'm more focused on the content, so that I can decide whether I want to give the roleplay/the player proper consideration. If a post format hinders my ability to access information within like five seconds, I'm moving on.

With character sheets and IC posts, I'm more tolerant, but I dread some more than others. I fault the coders more than I fault the people who decide to use the formats, because they're the ones who shared their unfriendly designs, but I wish every player considered the user experience when selecting code for their characters/posts.

And when it does come to IC posts, I'm sure the design does influence how well I receive the player's writing. It's harder to care or to bask in the sentiments if the words are barely legible, or if scrolling cuts off lines of text (it does happen with some formats). I'm also more likely to appreciate a post's embellishments in these scenarios, since I'm not on a mission like I am with recruitments, but I'll still enjoy well-written plaintext.

 

[WhiskeyMarten]

First and foremost, I care about the accessibility of the content. I'll consider an unstyled, plaintext interest check a hundred times more than one that uses an unfriendly format.

People have said it in other threads and I agree: if the format is not accessible via all devices, please consider adding a plaintext version below it. It's a godsend and can attract more players.

Yes I agree with this so much! If something doesn't seem easy for me to access it puts me off trying. It really is not hard to value accessibility over style, and even both are possible! It's not hard at all to just add a plaintext version underneath

 

[Jannah]

Tbh, a lot of the time the coding is likely to turn me off the RP. This is for an array of different reasons.

 

[Kaiju Cat]

I hate templates if I can’t read it then I’ll hit back space same if small, bright, or dark fonts are used. Mood with Gaia online, with how specific images are allowed recently there I have to enlist help with templates.

 

[A Sparkling Zombie]

Mood with Gaia online, with how specific images are allowed recently there I have to enlist help with templates.

Yes! I enjoyed the BBCode there, but specific picture dimensions for character sheets is the worst. It's hard enough finding a good image for a character.

 

[Kaiju Cat]

Yes! I enjoyed the BBCode there, but specific picture dimensions for character sheets is the worst. It's hard enough finding a good image for a character.

Oh I know that feeling I spend one time 20 minutes looking for pictures for a specific canon while one of their approved images.

 

[Idea]

Yes I agree with this so much! If something doesn't seem easy for me to access it puts me off trying. It really is not hard to value accessibility over style, and even both are possible! It's not hard at all to just add a plaintext version underneath

You might say that, but in some cases it's harder than you might think. It's true that most codes will just have a 'textbox' where all the text goes, and other than maybe removing color coding, you pretty much just copy paste it.

However, even recently there have been cases where making a plain-text version (I always add a "semi-coded" tab which only has the simplest codes like text coloring, bolds...) can take a lot more work because the text wasn't actually made in a single instance. In the RP in question I made this effect using crop images and code to make a dialogue box of sorts, to resemble a visual novel dialogue box, and every time my character spoke I used that code. Making a plain text version requires several instances of retrieving each piece, which seeing as my posts also happen to be on the longer side can both take time and require care that I don't miss a spot as reading a post with, say, a paragraph missing can ruin the experience. Other cases could involve putting text in certain positions which could end up out of order if simply copy-pasted. And this is not to mention what used to be possible with BBCode+, which at times could require div boxes in the middle of the text for the particular effect.

Accessibility can also be easier said than done as well. For one thing, what is readable is subjective. I've talked to people before who would refuse to read posts with the color yellow because they felt it quote "burned their eyes". I do think it's valid for them to not want to be uncomfortable reading of course, but I bring up the example to showcase that even small things can be the difference between people finding it readable and non-readable, and that me making something I find perfectly readable is not the same as others sharing that thought. Things like accommodating for phones for instance can also be a dramatic workload particularly for people with less coding experience, who aren't as intimately familiar with what exact sizes work for what and certain features of code that helps automate or simplify at least part of the process. Making a phone version of my codes is another thing which can take hours.

There is certainly a piece of good news: Anyone can read any post without the fancy parts of the code. It's not codeless, but it'll appear in plain text, code included. If you disable the rich editor, and press "reply" on the post you want to read, you will have the whole post in plain text. It's a two/three click solution (three assumes you're turning the rich editor back on afterwards) that works about as well as the simplest form of making a plain text version.



Now I'm not saying one shouldn't care about accessibility in selecting RPs. I do feel though that it's often just taken for granted that you can pretty much just snap your fingers and boom now you have a plain text or boom now you have a version that fits an entirely different device. I guess if you're just picking a code you can shop around for one that fits the bill, but if you're making the code we're quite possibly talking about hours of investment. It is definitely better to more accessible than not of course - but it isn't always easy, not unless you just say that if you can't do it easily then you can't add a code. But at that point, for someone who makes these codes for fun and as another outlet of creativity such as myself, that is putting the cart before the horse. Yeah you have to be reasonable, and yeah I do myself almost always have that semi-coded and phone version tabs (the second might be more missing if I find the code is already looks functional on phone), but in the end of the day making the code is part of the fun for me and therefore a choice between killing some of my fun or spending hours catering to people I don't even know will ever even look at my interest check... Is not a pleasant one. This is done at my own risk though - My code has been one of the reasons why my 1x1 interest checks come off as overwhelming to some, and since I made them I have little right to complain (that "little" coming from the aforementioned tabs).

 

[Onmyoji]

For interest checks "prefer minimal coding but I don't mind" (if reading from desktop). And "will avoid" heavy coding if reading on the phone.

Because in most cases I won't be able to read it as half (or all) of the text will be missing and elements won't be interactable if on the phone.
If I browse from desktop I can tolerate it because I can at least read full text.

Accessibility is a big issue and there are certain standards that are documented (WCAG2), so it's easy to tell what's accessible and what's not too much. I might have professional deformation as well, because I actually work with visually impaired people (and also have bad eyesight myself) and every time violation of accessibility standards makes me sad.

It doesn't mean I won't rp with people who code, but for actual roleplays I might ask to tone it down or use plain text version.
For interest checks, if I get really interested by the half of text I can read on phone I'll go check from desktop later lol

 

[sunshine and whiskey]

don't hate me here lol promise?

So, while I think that BBCode is good in some instances, in others, it is definitely not needed. For example, I give my players in groups options to either bbcode or not but let it be known that I am looking for character quality more than a fancy sheet. Some people who code can write great characters, and others can, but put more time into the coding than the actual character, imo.

I love me some BBCode, don't get me wrong, especially on RPNation but if it lacks character or writing quality then you might as well not use it.

Hope this makes sense! It's 1 am here, so my brain is a bit dead.

 

[Cresion Breezes]

I'm full of unpopular opinions but I think code usage can make RPs more interesting if it actively formats the RP in a way that puts it beyond simple writing and becomes an interactive medium. I get it if that's not everyone's thing, I just love me some ARG and text adventure elements in my RPs cuz I ain't no writer I'm a Gamer. Very basic example but I often put black text on a black box on purpose if I want that inform to be optional/hidden, it's meant to be out of the way and adds to whatever mystery is at hand.

Presentation of an RP, at least for me, isn't only visual but also interactive and code can do that. I don't care much about window dressing code just for the looks but I think coded elements that truly integrates into the story and play style of the RP are extremely commendable and awesome.

Also as someone who studies UI design, most codes I've seen suck from an intuitive usage point of view so people probably get turned off by it.

tldr: Good/engaging/intuitive coding elements > no code > code that actively hinders accessibility

 

[A Sparkling Zombie]

There is certainly a piece of good news: Anyone can read any post without the fancy parts of the code. It's not codeless, but it'll appear in plain text, code included. If you disable the rich editor, and press "reply" on the post you want to read, you will have the whole post in plain text. It's a two/three click solution (three assumes you're turning the rich editor back on afterwards) that works about as well as the simplest form of making a plain text version.

I get that coding is a lot of work. It's a lot more challenging than HTML and CSS because it involves manipulating the base codes that RPN offers "out of the box". That and it's not possible to use media queries. But I come from a QA mindset, so I'm maybe more inclined to stress usability amd practicality than maybe the average user on here.


If coders, or users of codes, decide they're okay with sacrificing accessibility and usability, and that they don't want to offer a plaintext version, they have that power, but I also get to make the choice that I'm too lazy to hit reply just so I can parse through all the BBCode to read the content. The author of the recruitment thread has to decide whether they want their pitch to be accessible to a wider range of players or if they want pretty, at least when the two are in conflict.

 

[Idea]

I get that coding is a lot of work. It's a lot more challenging than HTML and CSS because it involves manipulating the base codes that RPN offers "out of the box". That and it's not possible to use media queries. But I come from a QA mindset, so I'm maybe more inclined to stress usability amd practicality than maybe the average user on here.


If coders, or users of codes, decide they're okay with sacrificing accessibility and usability, and that they don't want to offer a plaintext version, they have that power, but I also get to make the choice that I'm too lazy to hit reply just so I can parse through all the BBCode to read the content. The author of the recruitment thread has to decide whether they want their pitch to be accessible to a wider range of players or if they want pretty, at least when the two are in conflict.

And that is perfectly fine. It is indeed a choice one must make as the one making the interest check, especially considering that many people don’t know the reply truck (heck many don’t even know what the rich mode is). As I mentioned I myself have little right to complain if I make my 1x1 interest checks have the codes I make for them and people then don’t like those. One could also point out that it isn’t as straightforward as “sacrificing accessibility = less interest” since the very existence of this thread is proof of an observable trend of people paying at least some degree of additional attention to interests with “pretty” codes, but I digress.


I guess my point in my response, primarily, was that a phone version, plaintext and other forms of accessibility should not be treated as an entitlement. They are not owed nor are they necessarily easy to make. It’s better if one had them of course, but other factors need to be taken into account as well. On the other hand, naturally don’t owe to the cider to read their post either, so if it’s not made with them in mind, they just won’t read it. But I have seen it taken as far as calling it some form of personal attack not making phone versions or codes fitting for other more particular groups, and often I see people who make more complex codes taken as if they were disregarding other people. I guess that kind of leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

 

[A Sparkling Zombie]

often I see people who make more complex codes taken as if they were disregarding other people.

I understand that coding is your hobby and that you want freedom to make your designs, and if that's your priority, go for it! But objectively, if someone chooses to not use a mobile-friendly design, or if they choose to use tiny or poorly contrasted font, then that person is not paying attention to the needs of mobile users and the visually impaired, especially if they understand such users exist.

And again, if that's not something someone cares about, go for it. No one can stop someone from taking that route, lol. The author has to decide how and to whom they want to advertise.

 

[Genii]

I browse on my phone so half the time the code doesn’t work for me.

 

[sunshine and whiskey]

I try to use mobile friendly codes but I am forgetful too

 

[Idea]

But objectively, if someone chooses to not use a mobile-friendly design, or if they choose to use tiny or poorly contrasted font, then that person is not paying attention to the needs of mobile users and the visually impaired, especially if they understand such users exist.

Taking someone into account is not the same as disregarding the costs to the benefits. I obviously care about the needs of my close friends, but that doesn’t mean I always have the availability to drop 6 hours for them, something that is often the kind of time a phone version can take me.

 

[nerdy tangents]

I think the issue is more that some people focus more on the visual than the text.

There is no such thing as purely visual roleplay. All roleplays at their core are written works that require your audience to be able to read your content so they can offer their own collaborations.

So if your content is only visible under very specific circumstances then it's just empty color.

That doesn't mean you can't add color in such a way as to make your post both pretty and readable. I went ahead and did both fairly easily.

Now interest checks might require you to add tabs, accordions, chapters, images, etc. but you can easily add those elements in such a way as to still make your work visible to everyone.

I find using fairly simple codes actually works best in the long run. It allows you to organize your material in easily digestible chunks and also lets it stand out a bit.

Take this very post it’s incredibly simple from a coding perspective. Just a colored background and border, justified text, and a column.

But it gives you a bit of pretty to look at while not sacrificing the readability of anyone.

 

[Jannah]

I browse on my phone so half the time the code doesn’t work for me.

Same. I'm often browsing mobile too. Even when I'm on my laptop, though, a lot of the codes are difficult to scroll through or have small (or coloured) text that is difficult to read. In other words, if members have to squint just to understand your roleplay premise then that's not a good look.

 

[Edric Blight]

I refuse to code. I can’t be bothered to learn it, I think it’s over the top, and it’s often not mobile friendly. Just a personal preference.

 

[Kaiju Cat]

I refuse to code. I can’t be bothered to learn it, I think it’s over the top, and it’s often not mobile friendly. Just a personal preference.

Same it’s why I hit the back button if it’s not mobile friendly.

 

[Luscinioide]

some codes are getting way too crazy. like, i have to actively hunt down where i'm supposed to click to get past the...introduction page (???) and by then, i've already lost interest. there's a huge difference between using tabs/dividers and having a multi-page interactive catastrophe where nobody knows how to navigate it except you.