Page
of 6

Enjin Site Feedback

55 replies
Joe
Posts:
137
Likes:
+56
Just Started
LEVEL 1
I totally agree with the comments in this thread.

For the past while it has become blatantly obvious that the CMS is no longer a main priority to the Enjin team. The fact that Enj Coin is the first thing on "quick links" only complements my statement here.

It's not a secret that Enjin is lagging behind in terms of technology, the markup is 10+ years out of date, not mobile responsive, doesn't give freedom to edit from the ground up, etc. I had this conversation with AT a while ago- ALL respectable CMS' have an option to create an entirely blank page, and this is something that enjin does not possess, and I personally feel like that is... well, outrageous. That coupled with the how restrictive the editor and such is, it doesn't really leave me with a good impression.

Speaking as a developer, when I have to work on the Enj CMS, i think "ugh". That's not something I should think.

Enjin makes up for the aged tech with a huge amount of features, and I feel like that is the only thing that keeps Webmasters on this platform.

I stopped suggesting Enjin to clients a VERY long time ago, and I feel like it will stay that way.

I strongly believe that Enjin is dying.
Posted Sep 18, 18
Agree
x 2
x 2
Love it
x 2
x 2
List
Undo
Posts:
84
Likes:
+78
Just Started
LEVEL 1
I've been thinking a lot about this. Enjin has been very important to me for a very long time. I learned a lot through Enjin, inadvertently or not. I made a living off designing on this platform for a very long time, and have hosted several of my own sites through it.

I absolutely agree that Enjin has lost touch with the CMS side of their business. Enjin Coin honestly looks like a very cool idea, and could be fantastic for the platform. The fact it's taken such a backseat though, is completely unacceptable. There were so many fantastic initiatives that they had going on which made it felt like they cared. They just seemed to have fallen out of focus.

I'm going to start off with some positives, though.

The positive:
- Ability to use HTML, CSS and JS at all. Something very valuable.
- Projects getting off the ground have the ability to get noticed within the Enjin network
- For Minecraft server owners specifically, having your forum, store and voting page all on the same site is really nice. It's harder (but not impossible) to achieve with any competitor.
- Multi-site profiles feel very social (hi friends)
- Slightly Cheaper than Buycraft + a Xen license + a VPS to host Xenforo, depending.
- When it works, the Enjin API
- Enjin Coin could be fantastic if you kept the promises.

The negitive:
- Very limited themeing capabilities outside of using CSS, hard for beginners.
- Unlike Xenforo, no templating engine. Makes a world of difference to be able to edit the source code of a module. I use jQuery (and a lot of !important's) to change the layout of certain modules, and it's stupid. Yes, I am a bad jQuery dev, but having to do this is completely garbage:

D-88c6a0.png
- Not mobile friendly. It's 2018.....
- Slow
- "themes" shipped as a base are all average at best. WHY MUST YOU USE SO MANY IMAGES????
- HTML tables. Again, it's 2018, I genuinely cannot believe that you guys have kept this up so long.
- Anyone remember when the new latest threads module launched and was super buggy but we had no choice but to use it til someone complained? I do.
- No community interaction from Enjin anymore. Last post from Maxim was a year ago. September 21th, 2017. Last online in June? How can the CD be that inactive?
- There are some pretty big bugs that haven't been fixed in FOREVER, like the ones mentioned by Hellomynameis99 and Tomo.
- No PaperSpigot support...??? how?
- No support for new games

Guys, we've seen how proactive you can be when you want to be. Enjin coin has a clearly laid out, fantastic roadmap. Why can't we have that? You have a community here who are willing to help you build a better product. Please at least give us something in return.

I know I have more to say, and have said a lot over the years, but this is just what I've got for now.

I hope someone sees this thread.
Posted Sep 18, 18
Like
x 6
x 6
Agree
x 3
x 3
Love it
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
2
Likes:
+7
I mean, my interaction with Enjin has only been as an user and even that has been limited.

From a Developer/Engineer standpoint, refactoring (meaning re-coding/re-creating) the whole CMS, features, bugs and so forth would be a huge undertaking. Not only that, but I'm sure the core languages being used is way outdated. This means that it will be exceedingly difficult to find developers whom are comfortable working with really old versions. Not only that, but these developers also need to have EXPERIENCE with the nuances & differences between old & new. You just won't find too many developers who would be (1) a good fit, (2) have the needed experience/skills and (3) be interested in working with very old, legacy dode.

It's also probably a whole lot of spaghetti code...

AKA: Tech is too old for its own good. The best chance Enjin CMS has would be a complete rewrite and even that might not be worth the cost expense.

Nonetheless, Enjin is a great and very unique product. I don't think there is anything out there that comes close to what it offers and I doubt anything will for some years to come. Personally, I'm happy it's still around!
Posted Sep 19, 18
Agree
x 2
x 2
Like
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
183
Likes:
+116
Active
LEVEL 2
@Dra- damn, tags don't work.

(482 days since this bug was reported)

Let me try this:
wrote:
I mean, my interaction with Enjin has only been as an user and even that has been limited.

From a Developer/Engineer standpoint, refactoring (meaning re-coding/re-creating) the whole CMS, features, bugs and so forth would be a huge undertaking. Not only that, but I'm sure the core languages being used is way outdated. This means that it will be exceedingly difficult to find developers whom are comfortable working with really old versions. Not only that, but these developers also need to have EXPERIENCE with the nuances & differences between old & new. You just won't find too many developers who would be (1) a good fit, (2) have the needed experience/skills and (3) be interested in working with very old, legacy dode.

It's also probably a whole lot of spaghetti code...

AKA: Tech is too old for its own good. The best chance Enjin CMS has would be a complete rewrite and even that might not be worth the cost expense.

Nonetheless, Enjin is a great and very unique product. I don't think there is anything out there that comes close to what it offers and I doubt anything will for some years to come. Personally, I'm happy it's still around!

I think you're 100% correct in stating that the code is old and probably rather messy at this stage - but that shouldn't be an excuse not to update or rewrite it.

Additionally, we're paying a lot of money for our plan, and not really getting much out of it. Sure, it was great back in 2015 when we first bought it, but that was... well, that was 2015. The world has moved on, but Enjin hasn't. I would consider moving but for the fact that Enjin don't allow us to export forum content (smart move :p ).

Look, I don't hate Enjin. Actually, I rather love it. That's why it's hard to see it getting shelved and shunned for projects like Enjin Coin. I can only hope that Enjin eventually realise that games using Enjin Coin need Enjin communities and start working on their CMS - unless, of course, anyone who is not already locked into the Enjin ecosystem decides to host their own site.



On a lighter note, let's play a game!! Guess how many posts this thread has before we get an official response! Prizes include bragging rights.

We're currently at 14 posts if you include the original post.
Posted Sep 19, 18
Like
x 1
x 1
Agree
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
174
Likes:
+64
Just Started
LEVEL 1
I agree with all the comments above, the problem is that we are doing the same thing as them in regards to complaints, we should excuse them to give full support to their CMS and not abandon it as usual.
Everything I've read in this post is true
» System of tables for the layout in 2018.
» Theme editor super limited, and based on images.
» New BBCODE editor [BUG] - Sin @.
» New module of Last Post [BUG].
» User counter module not compatible with BungeCore.
» Pay to use the API (You need to pay for 1 year to be allowed to use them), I am paying the ADVANCED plan since 2013, this is embarrassing.

They really need to do a mega update even if many websites are broken, make enjin a true CMS and not anything like it is now. Apart from their performance in mobile phones and low-resource PCs, it is very bad. Rendering is not good.

We pray that you listen to us thanks to this thread.
Posted Sep 19, 18
Agree
x 2
x 2
Like
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
3,885
Likes:
+1,033
Popular
LEVEL 4
Hey everyone - thank you for your feedback. We have definitely shifted a lot of the team's focus to Enjin Coin through most of 2018, but Enjin CMS is a core product and we would like to put energy into modernizing the website platform.

One of the issues we face is that with over 120 unique modules, these are all designed to work with the legacy layouts that all websites are built around. Much of our back-end code has actually been refactored and improved in 2016-2017, but it's clear that the front-end layout needs a complete overhaul.

I'd like to ask for some feedback! We have a few ways of doing a front-end revamp:

One way is to gradually modernize every module, one at a time, while retaining the "grid based" layout editor but with extra flexibility. I realize that a lot of websites here have been around for many years, and this would allow all websites to experience gradual updates without any effort from site owners.

The second option is to switch over to a brand new "V2" layout, while allowing V1 websites to stay online with the "old" design modules. You would need to flip a switch in your settings to change between V1 and V2 completely, and the version 2 layouts would start with a limited set of modules, but be fully customizable in terms of CSS and layout design. This is my preferred route as it would be mobile-compatible. The main challenge here is that many of the vestigial legacy modules might not make it in - things like WoW tabard, etc. We would analyze the most common and important modules across the platform and work in that order.

We're listening to your feedback in this thread and I thank you for expressing your concerns!
enjin-technical-director.png
Posted Sep 19, 18 · Last edited Sep 19, 18
Like
x 15
x 15
Love it
x 3
x 3
Agree
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
2
Likes:
+7
Witek wrote:
[...]

That's huge! A refactored backend to modern standards is half the battle (almost). It's great that this is crossed off the list.

Here are my recommendations regarding the Front-end:

Old Design Modules
  • "Old design modules" should remain in a "Legacy View" sort of option, completely separate from the new Modern View.
  • The allows you to not worry about weird edge cases and bugs when developing the new Modern View.
  • It also eliminates a lot of backwards compatibility issues that may arise. In my experience, I just silo the legacy system. It eliminates future headaches.
  • Allows you to test old functionality vs new functionality, and make sure it is working as expected / required.
  • In the case the user prefers the Legacy View over the Modern View, s/he would be able to select between each.

New Module View

Re: Feature Prioritization
  • Run a database query to find the most popular modules within the past 365 days. Base the feature priority list off the results
  • Post the list of the top 10 features/modules. Ask the community (1) what they like, (2)don't like about each feature and (3) any specific suggestions. Leave the topic open for 30 days, then begin further requirements/development/etc.

Hopefully these suggestions are useful.

It's absolutely great that the Tech Director is on the community's side! :)
Posted Sep 19, 18 · Last edited Sep 19, 18 by Drafun
Like
x 2
x 2
Agree
x 2
x 2
List
Undo
Joe
Posts:
137
Likes:
+56
Just Started
LEVEL 1
It's really nice to hear from someone on the Enjin team about this.

I think I speak on behalf of everyone who has commented in this thread when I say we ADORE the Enjin platform, whether it be the CMS or Coin, which is why voices and concerns have been raised in such a polite and organised manner, because as I said, we really do love this product.

But, personally- where you said:
Witek wrote:
 we would like to put energy into modernizing the website platform.

I (myself) think that "Would", is totally different to WILL.

Are there any Active plans to put more development resources into the CMS within the near feature? This year, even?

Enjin CMS is drastically lagging behind, and it really saddens me to see that.

I think we need to understand that development of a CMS is a big thing, and of course won't happen over night, but I think that being reassured that changes are planned and will happen will make a world of difference.
Posted Sep 19, 18
Agree
x 2
x 2
Like
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Posts:
4,790
Likes:
+2,724
Master
LEVEL 5
Witek wrote:
The second option is to switch over to a brand new "V2" layout, while allowing V1 websites to stay online with the "old" design modules. You would need to flip a switch in your settings to change between V1 and V2 completely, and the version 2 layouts would start with a limited set of modules, but be fully customizable in terms of CSS and layout design. This is my preferred route as it would be mobile-compatible. The main challenge here is that many of the vestigial legacy modules might not make it in - things like WoW tabard, etc. We would analyze the most common and important modules across the platform and work in that order.

We're listening to your feedback in this thread and I thank you for expressing your concerns!


- Having a switch would be ideal as this would allow admins / site owners to adjust on a schedule that works for them. Since this is a big change, I would also want to suggest that site owners or admins can work on a v2 site while their v1 is still live and active (the same way we can set a theme to a specific page). Having the ability to adjust / test their v2 site before live launch is the most reasonable way to get these sites migrated to the new format.
Posted Sep 19, 18 · Last edited Sep 19, 18 by AT SLAYER
Agree
x 6
x 6
Like
x 3
x 3
List
Undo
Posts:
8
Likes:
+3
wrote:
I would also want to suggest that site owners or admins can work on a v2 site while their v1 is still live and active (the same way we can set a theme to a specific page). Having the ability to adjust / test their v2 site before live launch is the most reasonable way to get these sites migrated to the new format.
I completely agree with this. It is the most realistic way to do things for site owners/admins as it becomes more manageable and they wouldn't have to make a whole new site.

This entire idea of a "version 2" is a great idea overall and I honestly believe it is the way that it should be done. It's much like what Microsoft has been doing to SharePoint Online's Web system over the past year or so. The thing I like about Enjin though is that the ability to customize is much more dominant and easy, and I would hope that it stays that way in a version 2 of the CMS.

That being said, I also agree with others that although this sounds good, what are the actual plans to implement it?
Posted Sep 19, 18
Like
x 1
x 1
Agree
x 1
x 1
List
Undo
Page
of 6
Social Media
Follow us on our social media!
You will receive information, news, sneak peaks, giveaways and more!
NoticeNotices