Didn't know a simple interface with a sound switch and a game start button can be designed this badly.
Click to start:
[sound on] [sound off] [ CLICK TO START ]
[x] Allow sound
I would also argue the MathDoku problem is different. That sounds like a mode confusion type issue, where the user expects a certain level of automation but it has been disabled by the system without adequate feedback.
[Start with sound] [Start without sound]1. an action – this is usually a verb in the imperative mood (e.g. Reply, Save, Add to basket)
2. a status – those omit the verb and only specify the new state of an object, which might be a lot of things, like a noun (Spam), an adjective (Favourite) or maybe an adverb (In progress, Later)
3. a navigation item – on the Web, this is better represented as a link, so let's not go into this here
I would argue that "with/without sound" is a clear example of a status here.
Also links are not buttons. There's nothing to get into here. It's straight up wrong from every perspective to think of a link as a button even from an accessibility standpoint.
Didn’t know a simple demo (with disclaimers) from someone who is clearly doing something novel could be commented on this badly.
I certainly was confused and had a hard time starting it. If a significant amount of people can't even figure out how to start the game, the problem isn't inconsequential.
A user's feedback is one of the best things that can ever happen to your program, the worst is to never ever get used by anyone, and the second worse is to have the users walk away with no idea why.
I tapped "click to start" on my phone a few times, saw nothing happened and assumed it didn't work on mobile and tapped back to come read the comments. I am neuroatypical, though, maybe I don't count as human.
Same reaction here.
Getting so pedantic about a minor point seems like it does more to stifle creativity and innovation and that it does to help.