Settlers of Catan stands out as a truly exceptional board game. Its brilliance lies in the dynamic of player interaction – the subtle alliances, the calculated betrayals, and the ever-shifting power balance that keeps everyone engaged until the very last turn. For many, including myself and my friends, Catan nights are more than just games; they are vital social connections, especially when life scatters us across different cities and countries.
When the 2020 pandemic struck, and physical gatherings became impossible, we, like many others, turned to the digital realm to keep our Catan tradition alive. Our chosen platform was the official Settlers of Catan online app. To put it mildly, the experience was… flawed. One particularly memorable usability quirk was the “I am not ready” button which you had to click to signal that you were ready to start the game. This initially caused collective confusion, but soon morphed into an endearing inside joke; now, every online game begins with a chorus of “I am not ready!” declarations.
Trading, a cornerstone of Catan, was another area riddled with usability issues. The interface made it bewildering to understand trade proposals. Beyond these comical frustrations, there were more serious problems: frequent server crashes and the dreaded inability to undo misclicks. I recall one agonizing instance where a slip of the mouse led to accidentally building a road instead of a ship, effectively costing me the game. Despite this litany of issues, we persisted. We continued to play Colonists Of Catan Online, week after week, enduring the glitches and frustrations.
Friday night camaraderie: Embracing the digital board game experience with friends through Colonists of Catan online.
Arc Browser: A Smooth Ride, But Where Are We Going?
Shifting gears to a different digital product, let’s consider Arc Browser. For those in the Mac ecosystem, Arc Browser has emerged as a compelling alternative to established browsers like Chrome and Safari. Marketed as the “browser of the future,” it garnered considerable buzz, fueled by endorsements from platforms like Lenny’s Podcast and positive feedback from tech-savvy professionals. As a product manager myself, I was keenly anticipating the Windows release, eager to explore this highly-praised browser.
However, when Arc Browser finally became available for Windows, my initial encounter left me underwhelmed. The realization dawned that migrating from Chrome to Arc Browser would demand a significant time investment. Years of Chrome usage had resulted in a finely-tuned system: customized work and personal profiles, a suite of essential extensions, muscle-memory for keyboard shortcuts, and a meticulously organized bookmark system. Furthermore, Chrome’s seamless synchronization across desktop and mobile devices was a feature I heavily relied upon. The crucial point was: I didn’t actually have a problem with Chrome. And, in my initial hours of using Arc, it didn’t strike me as being substantially superior to Chrome to justify the considerable effort of switching.
Anticipation versus reality: The promise of a new browser experience with Arc, and the practicalities of user switching costs.
Key Takeaways: User Value, Problem Solving, and Resistance to Change in Product Adoption
These two contrasting experiences – the frustrating yet compelling Colonists of Catan online and the polished but ultimately unpersuasive Arc Browser – offer valuable insights into product adoption, particularly regarding user value and usability.
1. Value Proposition Often Overrides Usability Hurdles
In product development, teams constantly grapple with two primary risk categories: user value risk and usability risk. User value risk centers on whether the product genuinely offers something users will find valuable. Usability risk, conversely, concerns whether users can effectively use the product to achieve their desired outcome.
Arc Browser undoubtedly excels in usability and user onboarding. Its proponents, including some of my colleagues, are enthusiastic about its streamlined interface and innovative features. While a positive user experience is always appreciated, in my case, Arc Browser didn’t present a compelling enough value proposition to warrant abandoning my existing, functional Chrome setup. On the other hand, Settlers of Catan online was plagued with usability issues. Yet, our desire to play Catan, to maintain our social connection and enjoy the game we loved, was so strong that we willingly navigated the technical shortcomings and interface frustrations.
Many users are remarkably tolerant of a less-than-perfect user interface if a product delivers significant value to them. Conversely, even the most beautifully designed and user-friendly product is likely to fail if it doesn’t address a genuine user need or solve a problem. Marty Cagan’s insightful article, “Focus on Value,” provides further exploration of this crucial concept.
2. Solving a User Problem is the Catalyst for Change
Bob Moesta, co-creator of the Jobs to be Done framework, eloquently describes the forces influencing user switching behavior in Lenny’s Podcast. He outlines four forces at play:
Image sourced from Bob’s article on this topic
Here’s a simplified breakdown:
- F1. Push of the situation: Dissatisfaction with the current solution.
- F2. Pull of the new idea: Perceived benefits of a new solution.
- F3. Anxiety of new solution: Concerns and uncertainties about switching.
- F4. Allegiance to current behavior: Inertia, existing habits, and switching costs.
The decision to switch hinges on this equation:
(F1 + F2) < (F3 + F4) = No switch. “What I have works well enough.”
(F1 + F2) > (F3 + F4) = Switch! “This new option is worth it!”
In the Arc Browser scenario, the “push” factor (F1) was negligible. I was content with Chrome. Furthermore, my long-established Chrome usage and customized setup (F4) represented a significant allegiance to my current behavior. In contrast, with Colonists of Catan online, the COVID-19 lockdown created a massive “push” (F1). Our inability to play Catan in person eliminated our existing solution. The online game, despite its flaws, became the only viable alternative, creating a strong pull (F2) to overcome the anxieties and inertia.
Addressing a user’s pain point is paramount. Many users won’t even consider a new product unless they are experiencing tangible frustration or unmet needs with their current situation.
3. Humans are Creatures of Habit and Resist Change
The Settlers of Catan online example raises another question: Given the plethora of online multiplayer games available, why did we persevere with a buggy and unreliable Catan platform for years instead of simply switching to a different, smoother game?
Douglas Adams, in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, humorously observed that resistance to change intensifies after the age of 35. As a group of time-constrained individuals in our mid-thirties, the prospect of learning a new game, coordinating rules, and onboarding everyone felt daunting. The familiar, albeit flawed, Catan online was simply easier than navigating the complexities of change.
This reluctance to change is captured by forces F3 and F4 in Moesta’s framework. Many users are apprehensive about the unknown. “Better the devil you know,” as the saying goes. Established habits are deeply ingrained and difficult to break. This is why marketers often target individuals during periods of significant life transitions, such as moving or starting university. These moments of upheaval create windows of opportunity where people are more receptive to adopting new products and behaviors, as their existing routines are already in flux.
Switching costs are further amplified in group settings, presenting a collective action problem. While changing browsers is an individual decision, persuading six friends to collectively switch to a new online game involves a much higher degree of coordination and effort. The comfort of the familiar, even when imperfect, often outweighs the perceived benefits of venturing into the unknown.
