Provide basic tagging support to allow add-ons to function

  • Do you agree with this request and would you like it to be relayed to GameForge ? 33

    1. Yes (32) 97%
    2. No (1) 3%

    OGame depends on add-ons to function: vanilla OGame is widely considered barely playable without one of OGL/Infinity/AGR, Trashsim variants remain the predominant ways people simulate OGame combats, and OGame Tracker is indispensable for both amortization calculations with lifeforms, and for just tracking your income and progress over time.


    A lack of communication with or basic support for extension creators repeatedly caused people to quit. Both the original creator (Warsaalk) and next maintainer of Trashsim (n00b) have quit while citing reasons akin to these, as has the OGame Tracker creator (Wonky), and there's a reason it's AntiGame Reborn and not AntiGame.


    Probably the biggest issue cited is that the OGame interface makes their job harder by refusing to properly tag any information, while constantly making many unannounced and unnecessary changes. For example, because of formatting changes, version 11.14 breaks ALL of the major extensions (OGL/Infinity/AGR) as well as OGame Tracker. As far as I can tell, these changes are cosmetic, and any utility they provide is greatly outweighed by the disutility of not having extensions work. As the OGame Tracker dev has confirmed that he will not be developing Tracker further, this means that OGame Tracker is functionally dead unless someone else decides to adopt it.


    There's a trivial solution here that would make add-on developers' lives easier, keep add-ons functioning for longer, while not impacting GF's development of OGame at all: simply include consistent XML/HTML tags in the web interface. For example, this might include a tag called "metal" for the HTML element containing the amount of metal found in a spy report, instead of the current "resspan. There's plenty of other ways to include metadata as well. This allows developers to simply parse the XML/HTML tags, instead of having to reverse engineer it from string matching. This would keep add-ons working across version updates. And best of all, these tags don't have to be visible to the user, so Gameforge can continue to make whatever cosmetic changes they want.


    This is not hard to implement. Even ChatGPT and Claude understand how to make tags of this form (see below). Why would the OGame devs not be able do this? Have humans fallen so far behind AI?

    In case this turns out to be actually technically challenging for some reason, I think that Gameforge should consider using a language model to do more of the coding. But I suspect it's an issue of willingness that they should address, before causing more add-on creators to quit (and thereby many paying players to follow).

    Edited once, last by .KaZe. ().

  • I completely agree with your assessment about the indispensable role of add-ons in OGame play in making it a functional and enjoyable experience. and the challenges faced by developers. The reliance on tools like OGL, Infinity, AGR, Trashsim, and OGame Tracker has become essential for most players and the impact of these disruptions goes beyond just the developers, it affects the entire player base. When essential add-ons break, players experience significant frustration and a broken gaming experience.


    Your point about the frequent and breaking changes to the interface is particularly critical. These changes, while perhaps minor from a design perspective, have significant repercussions for the functionality of essential add-ons. The recent update to version 11.14 is a prime example, where cosmetic alterations disrupted the entire ecosystem of extensions that players rely on. The fact that changes of these nature have led to the departure of key community developers like Warsaalk, n00b, and now Wonky is alarming and should be a wake-up call for Gameforge.


    The solution you proposed is both practical and straightforward: consistent XML/HTML tagging in the web interface. This would streamline the process for add-on developers, allowing them to adapt more quickly to updates and maintain functionality. The example you gave, such as tagging the metal amount in spy reports, highlights how a small change can have a big impact. By implementing these tags, Gameforge would be able to continue their cosmetic updates without alienating the developers who enhance their game. A collaborative relationship with the community developers.,and predictable development through consistent XML/HTML tagging could encourage more innovation within the community. This collaboration could lead to the creation of even more powerful and user-friendly tools, further enhancing the player experience and potentially attracting new players to the game.


    It's clear that Gameforge needs to prioritise better communication and support for the add-on developer community. By doing so, they will not only retain these crucial contributors but also maintain their paying player base, who rely heavily on these add-ons for a smooth gaming experience.

  • It's clear that Gameforge needs to prioritise better communication and support for the add-on developer community. By doing so, they will not only retain these crucial contributors but also maintain their paying player base, who rely heavily on these add-ons for a smooth gaming experience.

    Thank you for the response, ChatGPT :)


    Now that we've heard from Anthropic and OpenAI, does Gemini want to chime in, perhaps?

  • ... Nevermind. I've been told that Gameforge has added a bunch of tags in a recent PTS update already, including the metal example I gave above and some of the examples Wonky complained about. 🤦‍♂️


    However, a bunch of information remains untagged, such as planet temperature, information about queued buildings, completion time for shipyard queue, highscores, or, most importantly, fleet compositions and missions in the event list(!!).


    So my point remains, albeit less strongly.

  • Good morning,

    Thank you for this suggestion.

    I've just included a poll in the first post to find out what players think and whether they'd like this suggestion to be passed on to GameForge.

    The poll lasts 30 days and all opinions are welcome.

    Thank you in advance for your involvement !

  • TLDR:

    - added a worse version of a feature that all major add-ons already have

    - broke said add-ons (ie. The only thing keeping the game playable)

  • TLDR:

    - added a worse version of a feature that all major add-ons already have

    - broke said add-ons (ie. The only thing keeping the game playable)

    Wait, only one? I see like 5 copies of worse features. :thumbsup:


    Don't forget that this patch also makes galaxy look worse and harder to parse with the moon update!

  • May I also add that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY asked for the moon update in the galaxy view, or any of the other so-called "features" for that matter.

  • I’m delighted with the new features breaking all addons and making the game slower once again. I love sitting watching a spinning wheel when I want to look at my espionage reports. I also love that the list brings back the spinning wheel every time there is a new espionage report. Add on the bonus of the shortened report only showing the res on planet/moon not the fleet or defence - it really makes fleeting easier having to expand every single report to see fleet/defence.


    Added bonuses:

    - mobile view now longer has message icons and everything is offset.

    - I now get an extra message on every combat ~30 seconds later telling me that I have lost my title - I love extra messages in a laggy new message view!


    all in all, my feedback can only be a huge well done on the implementation of this update that everyone was crying out for. It’s fantastic.

    Space Pyrate

  • Neotinea

    Closed the thread.