CAG 2.0 vs 3.0

ssjmichael

ssjmichael

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
So now that I've spent some time on CAG 3.0, I can safely say that it sucks.  Maybe the things I find wrong with it can be fixed, but it's clear this software is far worse than VBulletin.  I honestly would rather you go back to 2.0. I don't know if it's to save money or what, but it's simply a better software.

Vote for what you prefer, 2.0, or the current iteration of 3.0

 
I actually like the new CAG 3.0 facelift, it still has some of the old CAG look to it with the dark theme, but with some nice new features added.  Notification and new mobile CAG comes to mind. Overall still the same CAG I love and it's free. :D

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a fan, but I'm resistant to change. Maybe it'll take some time to get used to. It's prevented me from coming here more often though. I used to check the deals multiple times a day, but now it's maybe once a week.

 
These are my main beefs so far:

No Searchable topics

No  option to "Wikify" posts (i.e. have others edit the op)

The Site is slower to post messages

The forum width is too small on my monitor

The custom spoiler tags don't work properly

The  max image size per post is too short

the max post length is too short

Nested quotes are terrible

The quote box isn't defined well enough in the dark theme

The Dark theme while better, is still not to my liking. I'd rather it all black

The popup window to enter image URL's and links are too large

 
Last edited by a moderator:
the only reason i voted for CAG 2.0 is because i still cant post replys on ANY forums using IE8. here at work we use XP and I have IE8 and for some reason the post reply box doesnt show up. I have to open chrome just to post a reply like this... annoying and Im not really wanting to switch to chrome just for that.

 
I like 3.0 now that it's working better and most things are back.

I like the look, it seems to load faster, and I love the notification system as I can just load one forum and see if any of the threads I'm actively interested in have new posts--quicker than bothering with subscriptions etc. as I can just look for that number at the top and see if there's anything new, and if not move on.

 
btw1217 said:
Not a fan, but I'm resistant to change. Maybe it'll take some time to get used to. It's prevented me from coming here more often though. I used to check the deals multiple times a day, but now it's maybe once a week.
Click to expand...
I'm resistant to change too, and I'm a semi-minimalist. CAG 3.0 has way too much useless fluff. I used to browse on CAG mobile (styleid=18) 95% of the time, and now I'm on Tapatalk 95% of the time (which is still shit).

Honestly, I still can't find anything. Not only can I not keep up with my old suscribed threads, I pretty much gave up looking for new threads.

 
The only thing I don't like about 3.0 is that it's a live beta.  Rolling out a release like this is just asking for people to leave.  It's barely functional in its current state and has been a slow, painful process.  The bug with the new post button disappearing constantly is getting very old, very fast.

On the other hand, notifications are kind of cool but honestly weren't worth all this hassle.  In a few months when things are back to normal I might vote, but right now I'm blinded by all the issues 3.0 has created.  I can say that if any functionality is permanently lost, then 2.0 was better.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ssjmichael said:
Nested quotes are terrible

The quote box isn't defined well enough in the dark theme
Click to expand...
I can absolutely agree with these points. this new quoting system is not defined enough. it needs to stand out more against the black background. It's even fairly undefined on the white background as well.

I also can't figure out how to "unsubscribe" to threads. My notifications are blowing up over threads I no longer care about. Since I'm on the subject, how do I got about finding the threads I've posted in? in the vbuetin, I could click "user CP" and it would give me a list of threads i'm subscribed to. i can't find that anywhere around here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ssjmichael said:
this software is far worse than VBulletin.
Click to expand...
Laughed out loud. As someone who's worked for thousands of hours with both VB and IPS (this), it's incredible how much better this software is.

I've browsed every page of the update thread and all of the feedback topics people have posted, and literally 95%+ of all complaints about "missing" features are just the result of people not being used to the new layout. It has nothing to do with the software. This software is 10x more usable and feature-rich than CAG 2.0, and after the admins continue to bring features back and members have spent more than a week with the new version that will become apparent.

Here are a few "answers" to the complaints on this thread.

Nested Quotes

This is a simple Yes/No option on the administration side of the software. It's off by default. I don't know why the admins chose to enable it, but that's their prerogative and has nothing to do with the software updates.

Thread Subscriptions

At the very top-right of every thread, there is a giant "Follow this Topic" button. This is the new "subscribe." Unfollow to unsubscribe. You can manage all subscriptions via the "Content I Follow" page on your profile, which is linked by clicking your name at the very top where the sign-in/out is.

Other

No Searchable topics - the software has this, it hasn't been enabled yet.

No option to "Wikify" posts (i.e. have others edit the op) - I'm assuming this is something they're still working on. With all of the work during such a large migration this definitely won't be a top priority.

The Site is slower to post messages - this is subjective. For me, personally, I've found the opposite. It's something that will stabilize in the future when there aren't drastic changes happening constantly in the background.

The forum width is too small on my monitor - Subjective. Many people think fixed width is easier to read, which is why the majority of sites utilize it.

The following are all just things the admins have enabled that could easily be changed with 2-3 clicks. Whether they plan to I don't know.

  • The custom spoiler tags don't work properly
  • The max image size per post is too short
  • the max post length is too short
  • Nested quotes are terrible]
  • The quote box isn't defined well enough in the dark theme
  • The Dark theme while better, is still not to my liking. I'd rather it all black
  • The popup window to enter image URL's and links are too large
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Add to this that posts by people on the iggy list show up in a bright white band in the dark background is annoying.

The go to last unread post feature keeps disappearing.

Basic functions in CAG2.0 are missing, while CAG3.0 has a bunch of social media garbage, notifications, likes, and other crap that doesn't contribute to me FINDING CHEAP ASS GAMES!

ssjmichael said:
These are my main beefs so far:

No Searchable topics

No option to "Wikify" posts (i.e. have others edit the op)

The Site is slower to post messages

The forum width is too small on my monitor

The custom spoiler tags don't work properly

The max image size per post is too short

the max post length is too short

Nested quotes are terrible

The quote box isn't defined well enough in the dark theme

The Dark theme while better, is still not to my liking. I'd rather it all black

The popup window to enter image URL's and links are too large
Click to expand...
 
3.0 is way better that the old CAG.com. Most people hate change and do not know how to adjust. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2.0 was perfect for me.

This version is trash.  Not that anyone cares, but I'll be visiting less due to it

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2.0 for me until all the features from it are returned. They really should not have launched 3.0 until all the features from 2.0 were ready.

 
i agree with most of the complaints. i liked 2.0 better. Its my understanding this still isnt final though, right?  if so wait till the kinks are hammered out before deciding. my biggest gripe is you cant browse all your posts to track your replies and stuff. going to your profile and clicking posts only shows 3 or 4 posts. I really hope thats a bug since the little follow button things worthless

 
I don't like 3.0 either. I've found it MORE difficult to try and edit/format my threads. I just don't like the new setup.

Like others I have noticed that the overall number of deals being posted or shared has decreased.... significantly.

 
Kenshindono said:
my biggest gripe is you cant browse all your posts to track your replies and stuff. going to your profile and clicking posts only shows 3 or 4 posts. I really hope thats a bug since the little follow button things worthless
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. You CAN do that. On the page that shows "3-4 posts," hit the Find Content button on the top right. You can then sort between topics, posts, blogs, images, etc. etc that you've either created or posted in.

That doesn't show content you follow, though (although there is overlap since most auto-follow what they post in). I think you want "Content I Follow," which is linked under your username where you sign-in.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Traaginen said:
The forum width is too small on my monitor - Subjective. Many people think fixed width is easier to read, which is why the majority of sites utilize it.
Click to expand...
Absolute, total [bovine excrement]!!! It's 2013 and the days of having to make your forum float in the middle of a 1024 x 768 resolution screen ended about a decade ago.

"Majority" does not mean what you apparently think it means, because the reason people are complaining about the borked-up, non-"liquid" forum displaying as a narrow strip in the middle of the browser window is because hardly any forums use it. I just randomly opened the boards at DVD Talk, Anandtech, Blu-ray.com, Superiorpics, Android Central, Hard OCP, and Slick Deals and every single one of them resizes to fill the width of the browser window. The only one I was able to find was Battlelog's forums where the side columns and forums are all fixed widths and the elements spread out to fill the width, but don't change sizes.

While one's reaction to a narrow strip layout from 2003 is subjective, I think that the idea that "most people" think it's easier to read and "a majority of forums utilize it" are opinions unsupported by the facts and reality.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have to agree with others--I am using this board far less since the change--it's not as nice as it was before.

Things that bug me about 3.0 are 

- Cannot search just the current thread/forum

- need to be able to edit the first post--what happened to the wiki posts? (I can no longer edit the post I had been maintaining and the person who owns it hasn't been active for a year)

- width is too small--allow forum to fill width of browser instead of having the huge borders on both sides.

 
DirkBelig said:
Absolute, total [bovine excrement]!!! It's 2013 and the days of having to make your forum float in the middle of a 1024 x 768 resolution screen ended about a decade ago.

"Majority" does not mean what you apparently think it means, because the reason people are complaining about the borked-up, non-"liquid" forum displaying as a narrow strip in the middle of the browser window is because hardly any forums use it. I just randomly opened the boards at DVD Talk, Anandtech, Blu-ray.com, Superiorpics, Android Central, Hard OCP, and Slick Deals and every single one of them resizes to fill the width of the browser window. The only one I was able to find was Battlelog's forums where the side columns and forums are all fixed widths and the elements spread out to fill the width, but don't change sizes.
Click to expand...
I said the majority of sites utilize it, which is a pretty solid fact. Whether or not you feel it suits forums doesn't change that. It's not like fixed-width forums are uncommon either; the very last site I was on, Gamespot, has fixed width boards.

While one's reaction to a narrow strip layout from 2003 is subjective, I think that the idea that "most people" think it's easier to read and "a majority of forums utilize it" are opinions unsupported by the facts and reality.
Click to expand...
The year someone reacted has nothing to do with whether something is subjective. Something that's subjective is based on one's opinion, which is exactly what dictates whether or not we like the layout. It's perfectly fine for you to dislike fixed-width, just as I can simultaneously like it. That's why it's subjective.

There's a reason all sites don't automatically set the width to 100% and call it good. It's common knowledge in web design that there's a point where readability rapidly diminishes as width increases. That's not an opinion, it's the prevailing reason fixed-widths and maximum widths exists. I also never said "most people" think it's easier to read, I said "many people," which is a very conservative statement.

And again, I never said the majority of forums utilize it. In fact, this site isn't even fixed-width. It takes up all browser width to a maximum of 1000px. It's fine if people prefer a larger maximum, and I'm all for it, but I did want to point out why a dynamic width of 95% isn't always a good idea.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blah-blah-woof-woof. People are complaining about the width of the FORUMS - which is what CAG mostly is - and called out on your BS, you're trying to weasel word it that you meant SITES, not FORUMS. Spin like a top; it doesn't change the fact that judging from what people are repeatedly saying, the FORUM is too narrow and they don't like it.

 
DirkBelig said:
Blah-blah-woof-woof. People are complaining about the width of the FORUMS - which is what CAG mostly is - and called out on your BS, you're trying to weasel word it that you meant SITES, not FORUMS. Spin like a top; it doesn't change the fact that judging from what people are repeatedly saying, the FORUM is too narrow and they don't like it.
Click to expand...
I've offered nothing but fact-based discussion on an alternative viewpoint that happens to differ from yours. Meanwhile, you've gone off and completely misquoted what I've said in several places ("weasel word it" apparently means taking direct quotes), completely misunderstood the definition of subjective, and passed off your own grossly subjective opinion as fact. Yet here I am, the one full of BS.

There's really only two things that can be happening here. Either you're attacking me because I'm of a differing opinion than you, or you've misread what I've said.

It's really impossible to argue a single thing I've said. Lets break it down.

The forum width is too small on my monitor - Subjective. Many people think fixed width is easier to read, which is why the majority of sites utilize it.
Click to expand...
Notice how I'm not saying what's best for this site, what you should believe, or what most people here want.

Fact: the forum width being too small is an opinion, meaning it's subjective.

Fact: the majority of the web is limited-width.

Fact: Many people think limited width is easier to read. Did I say most? No, though internet-wide it's probably true.

There's not a single opinion there.

Arguing whether or not most sites are limited width (fact) or that most forums are full-width (not a fact) is just pointless semantics since I was using it to illustrate a point that's 100% true. I really have no idea why you're upset with anything there because I haven't even disagreed that people have said they want this forum wider.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I run a heavily customized Mybb forum script on my site. IPB allows for things VB can't provide. CAG 3.0 is great. For one dude, John pulled off some crazy shit. I found the screenshots.

 
Doesn't work for me. I miss 2.0. I wanted to reply to Cheapy's "Ain't mad about the XBox One" entry, but I couldn't add my comment as there was no comment box to type in.

When I try to quote a post, a green "loading" type of box appears above for an instant, and disappears, with no visual results.

I'm running IE9 with N360 controlling my security settings, so it's probably not liking CAG's code, but I previously had no problems with the site in 2.0.

I find myself not frequenting CAG daily anymore, and in fact I'll be lucky to visit the site once or twice a month now since the change. Shame really.

 
Traaginen said:
Fact: the majority of the web is limited-width.
There's not a single opinion there.
Click to expand...
Provide examples. I listed SEVEN (7) forums that were liquid. You just reiterate your opinion and declare it fact. Just as you don't seem to know what the word "majority" means, you seem to have your own unique version of what "fact" is. Try www.m-w.com and get back to us.

 
DirkBelig said:
Provide examples. I listed SEVEN (7) forums that were liquid. You just reiterate your opinion and declare it fact. Just as you don't seem to know what the word "majority" means, you seem to have your own unique version of what "fact" is. Try www.m-w.com and get back to us.
Click to expand...
Kid, I'm a web designer. It's a hilariously obvious fact. Going by your own definitions:

Facebook, Twitter, Gamespot, IGN, Youtube, Google's entire content area...CAG (according to you).

I could go on for millions of lines. Oh, but I bet you'd rather I link forums as opposed to top 10 sites.

http://eldersouls.com/ | http://tesof.com/ | http://skyrimforums.org | http://www.gamespot.com/forums/

That's weird, the last four forums I went to are all limited/fixed/static widths.

But hey, you listed 7 cherry-picked websites. The funny thing is that half of your examples are limited-width for the main page / content with vanilla Vbulletin/etc forums that have no styling... That's why the forums are "fluid," and it's not even most of the site. Even going beyond that, most of those forums have something like a width: 80% to make them fluid. Technically, even those are in line with what I said, e.g. "limited-width" is anything that's not always 100%.

Do you want to know the funniest thing about this whole conversation? CAG has a fluid layout. In fact, it's more fluid than most of the sites you listed. If you don't believe me, make your browser as small as possible and then drag it to maximum width. The difference -- and what you don't like -- is that the maximum width is 1000px, which is slightly less than your examples. You clearly don't know what you're talking about, but we've already established that.

By all means feel free to continue, but at this point the thread is just getting derailed and I've justified my thoughts several times over, so I'll just return to my usual troubleshooting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I barely recall what 2.0 looked like...

Once the ability to search forums/threads is reinstated I will be very happy! :)

 
While I'm slowly getting to know 3.0, I don't like it compared to 2.0.

I didn't use many features and still don't, but just browsing 3.0 is harder than 2.0

I can't put my finger on it either... if its the text size or style, but it gets jumbled into a big mess when EVERYTHING IS BOLD.

It also seems like there are less topics per page, and I lost the ability to click the forums button to quickly go to the deals section.

On a side note, it would have been nice to see some notice of the change so I could backup my collection before it got taken down.

 
Not a big fan of 3.0.  Main problems are the big empty spaces on the sides of the page, the theme color (dark is much better than white, but still needs some tweaking) plus I miss the forum change drop down menu.  As a result, not purposely, but subconsciously maybe, I'm going to CAG a lot less often than I used to.

 
elessar123 said:
Says the person with 39 posts.

Since 3.0, I personally went from spending maybe an hour or two a day on here, to 10 minutes a week.
Click to expand...
Same here. As someone who is a prolific poster, i barely spend time on here anymore. I wonder if traffic is down overall on the site.

It's not about fear of change. It's just the site is now slow as balls. Even on mobile. That horrendous "Loading..." dialogue on the mobile is there way too long.

 
I like it.  I'm just about done updating my collection and have made a list of games to add to the system once that's up and running. 

 
Dont like 3.0 one bit, my main gripe is with the colleciton layout, i cant order it by date/genre/platform, and a LARGE percent of images are missing, it better not be finished, because it sucks right now.

 
CAG 2.0 falls under if it ain't broke...territory. Wonder why it was changed.

Seems like they are working their butts off to get this site going, BUT, sometimes, you can't be afraid to throw everything out! I don't know. Just don't want to see CAG dwindle away. I saw a really good, massive (non-gaming)message board dwindle away before.
 
Peffse said:
While I'm slowly getting to know 3.0, I don't like it compared to 2.0.

I didn't use many features and still don't, but just browsing 3.0 is harder than 2.0

I can't put my finger on it either... if its the text size or style, but it gets jumbled into a big mess when EVERYTHING IS BOLD.

It also seems like there are less topics per page, and I lost the ability to click the forums button to quickly go to the deals section.

On a side note, it would have been nice to see some notice of the change so I could backup my collection before it got taken down.
Click to expand...
Completely agree.

-IMO the main page is just too cluttered with unpleasantly formatted lists.

-Twitter Feed and "top deals" need to have a hide button like in 2.0

-CAGCAST and Review banners bloat up front page sitting on top of everything. I can only see 3 'top deals' threads on it currently w/out scrolling. Change back to vertical format/two columns (like 2.0)

-There's WAY too much unused margin space, thread titles are too jumbled together & take up to FOUR LINES to display. I'd rather read a single sentence than a block of text to figure out what's being posted.

-Add a single or double line option for displaying the forum threads? Gonna go out on a limb and use TPB's listing option as a reference.

-Should add Console/Retailer specific icons left of thread-title column like in 2.0. Made skimming much easier when I wanted to check if there was something to use a gift card on.

I'm also not actively browsing as often as I used to, it's just not as nice to navigate around as 2.0 was. That said, fixing at least 3 of the above would go a LONG way to improving the site layout, for certain.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top