Odd color choice for EVERYTHING now

Indeed! that's what it was -- thanks for the tip. keithcurtis said: Check to make sure this isn't a cut and paste issue. If the text is copied from a source which defines the text color as black, and it is not a clean text-only paste, that formatting can carry through. If you suspect this, try running it through a text editor like notepad first. The eraser tool in the text formatting bar can help too, though it is not as guaranteed a solution. Ken R. said: this black on black really doesn't work for me either. in handouts

Dark Mode for the whole site can't come fast enough. I genuinely don't know why it's taken as long as it has for the process to get started. I understand it takes time to implement new things and I know complaining about stuff like this doesn't change the past, but dear God is the site hard to look at overall. I really don't mean to sound hateful, but seriously, we need that dark mode fast. And also, I have no problem with the color #e10085/magenta, but I really don't like seeing so much of it across the site. It looks too close to the color of a previously clicked link. A dark mode will help, but I don't think it'll fix all of the problems with this specific color. It doesn't feel like it's unifying the site's different styles. I'll reserve judgment for after the dark mode release, but I'm nonplussed as it stands.

Thanks Drespar. That is a super improvement. Map page looks good. Front page is no longer Pink City. :) Pink has always been Roll20's brand-recognition color, and its usage (in moderation) is understandable a Good Thing. Any other criticisms I'd have for things that were affected by this CSS facelift fall into the personal preference category, which is entirely subjective.  Drespar said: Hey everyone, As folks have noticed, we were in the midst of pushing out updates and changes to address key feedback items. Below is the list of what's changed: Forum title links on the main forum page has been changed. It will now only show color on hover. Updated reply links to gray color with pink highlight on hover Updated the "new post/reply" in forum -- the WYSIWYG editor to remove the pink outline On the campaign details, the profile box in the top right is no longer all pink text Fixed the page drop down menu in the VTT so there is no longer a white background Thank you everyone for the feedback thus far and your patience while we were addressing things directly. We believe these changes handle some of the biggest issues folks were mentioning. We are still going to be keeping watch on this thread and other channels for other areas that need addressed in addition to addressing a few items still outstanding. Please feel free to continue providing feedback on areas that you believe need addressed.

I suffer from migraines related to visual strain and the prevalence of an extremely saturated pink makes general navigation more painful for me than previously.  I'd prefer something cooler and less saturated color wise.

Gabriel P. said: I suffer from migraines related to visual strain and the prevalence of an extremely saturated pink makes general navigation more painful for me than previously.  I'd prefer something cooler and less saturated color wise. The pink should be largely gone now. If you are still seeing it, try flushing the cache on your browser. I actually prefer this new new look to the "original".

Anything less than a rollback is evidence of Roll20 ignoring our feedback. They are going full-steam ahead with the problem that they've made. You can rollback a website change just as quickly as you implement it. The  WYSIWYG editor still has some problems. The options for the "Table" insert are still transparent:

Thanks for the fix.  I guess it was even fairly quick for how fast roll20 does things.  I still have to wonder how such a terrible mistake goes live in the first place, and whether any process to ensure quality will be put in place to avoid a similar disaster in the future, but I doubt we'll ever hear answers about that.  I really do like using this product and want to support it, but at times it can be challenging.

Grand DM said: Drespar said: Please feel free to continue providing feedback on areas that you believe need addressed. No one wants ANY pink. Your paying customers would like the site reverted back to the way it was. What is the logic behind this change? Having pink links or hover-over pink does not help make your brand. If anything it's going to drive people away. It literally does nothing to improve the site. Let's not go too far there. I consider the pink an improvement and am sad to see it mostly vanish from the forum. Try turning your monitor brightness down, it is not that bad once you do. Everything in nice and clean and on brand.  Most people have it to bright for the light they work in anyways. Also it could be worst with the hot pink on purple from their logo. I wonder if that's why i didn't mind it as much as others, since I already had my brightness turned way down.

Agreed with GiGs. There has always been some degree of pink on the site, especially the newer sections (Help Center, entry page). It's one of their trademark colors. I'm fine with pink. Just not overwhelmingly so, as was the case yesterday. I am content with the redux now, and feel confident that the remaining quirks will be worked through in time, especially as site redesign and dark mode are being developed. The current state of affairs is almost certainly a resting point, not the finish line.

keithcurtis said: Agreed with GiGs. There has always been some degree of pink on the site, especially the newer sections (Help Center, entry page). It's one of their trademark colors. I'm fine with pink. Just not overwhelmingly so, as was the case yesterday. I am content with the redux now, and feel confident that the remaining quirks will be worked through in time, especially as site redesign and dark mode are being developed. The current state of affairs is almost certainly a resting point, not the finish line. The pink is roll20's trademark colour, as you say, and I don't mind them reducing the amount of it, using it more to accents. I think the redux - the parts of it that work, anyway - are more acccessibility-friendly, but there are still areas that need work even on the forums. Click the drop down on the top left when writhing a new post: when you try to select a style, that drop down is hard to use.

As a web designer, I do not wait until the very end of the day to publish changes and certainly do not just walk away without seeing if there are any issues. What does happen though, is management telling designers that everything will just blow over and to publish the changes regardless. The same thing happened with the Dark Mode update; The changes went live and was riddled with bugs. Instead of rolling back the update and improving it for a better re-release, they kept the bad changes live until implementing a fix for the fix. There is no reason for Users to have to deal with a bad site update when there should always be a snapshot to fall back onto.

The Foegetter said: As a web designer, I do not wait until the very end of the day to publish changes and certainly do not just walk away without seeing if there are any issues. What does happen though, is management telling designers that everything will just blow over and to publish the changes regardless. The same thing happened with the Dark Mode update; The changes went live and was riddled with bugs. Instead of rolling back the update and improving it for a better re-release, they kept the bad changes live until implementing a fix for the fix. There is no reason for Users to have to deal with a bad site update when there should always be a snapshot to fall back onto. I don't know why a change like this wasnt pushed to Dev first. It's something that affects everyone, and is very easy to get a reaction just from looking at it. It's fine (questionable, maybe) if they ignore reactions like, "I don't like this, it looks awful, change it back". But they'd have been very quick to spot feedback like, "I can't read this. I can't play any more." Why do they only use Dev for things that will take active use over a long time to even notice a change, and then big things that affect everyone get pushed live straight away? This just doesn't seem sensible when they have a platform perfect for testing.

GiGs said: I don't know why a change like this wasnt pushed to Dev first. It's something that affects everyone, and is very easy to get a reaction just from looking at it. It's fine (questionable, maybe) if they ignore reactions like, "I don't like this, it looks awful, change it back". But they'd have been very quick to spot feedback like, "I can't read this. I can't play any more." Why do they only use Dev for things that will take active use over a long time to even notice a change, and then big things that affect everyone get pushed live straight away? This just doesn't seem sensible when they have a platform perfect for testing. What a fantastic point. I personally dabble in the Dev server specifically to help Roll20 improve. There are lots of others like us that go out of our way to test out new features so that others do not have to. By the nature of the site, almost every game is guaranteed to have at least one person that is OK with doing a little more work for the group to have fun.  I'm a technical person, so finding these bugs is actually a little entertaining to me, but they should not be front-facing from the start. The way the VTT works within the site makes changes like on the Forums difficult to allow a select group to test but at the least there can be some communication. I remember getting emails from Roll20 in the past specifically for Pro-Users to test out Dev server features (or to just give feedback on aesthetic choices) but it seems that hasn't happened in over a year?

I did post before in a few places include this thread, but as this is now the official thread for the site design changes; This site change has been a huge downgrade for me accessability wise. I suffer from a form of light sensitivity where some colours but bright whites in particular blur over others and cause a level of eye strain which can quickly become painful. I'm basically closing one eye and squinting at the screen while I try and write this response. If this is a brand thing for Roll20 to redesign the site, then I have to say it's a pretty bad look for the brand to make their site unfriendly for those suffering eye conditions such as my own and not offer an alternative. Sadly the Virtual Tabletop it'self offers not the greatest reprieve from the issue of brightess, as many of the sheets available were programmed prior to the implementation of Dark Mode and as such present issues such as displaying black-on-black text either in sheet or in their chat output. Likewise as many of these sheets were user made, many are unlikely to see updates to make them more friendly towards dark mode use. Anyways, without hyperbole this much was painful to write so I hope turns out worth the effort. Would appreciate a Roll20 response regarding their Site Accessability Policy moving forwards.

Out of curiosity, how did you manage the site the day before yesterday? It had about the same amount of white. The major difference between then and now is that the thread titles are dark gray instead of a medium blue. And the best thing to take away from this is that the work done that temporarily made the site super pink was apparently preparatory to implementing a dark mode that would include the forums. Hopefully that can improve accessibility for lots of folks.

Whilst i am not the person that said the last comment there, i do also suffer from light sensitivity and chronic migraines myself and roll20 has always been a struggle, but never so much as yesterday. I do not know what precisely changed in terms of lighting itself, but the contrast or simple color choices in effect since then have had a massive negative impact on my ability to use the site as in its current state its still right on the edge of unusable. Dark mode without plugins, which have historically never worked for me, would be great improvement thatd enable me to not go out of every single LFG with a brewing headache. The site changes have hit me where it hurts quite literally and im just hoping against hope the dev team is fast in its work

"No one wants  ANY  pink. Your paying customers would like the site reverted back to the way it was. What is the logic behind this change? Having pink links or hover-over pink does not help make your brand. If anything it's going to drive people away. It literally does nothing to improve the site." Hit the nail on the head right there.

Daniel S. said: "No one wants  ANY  pink. Your paying customers would like the site reverted back to the way it was. What is the logic behind this change? Having pink links or hover-over pink does not help make your brand. If anything it's going to drive people away. It literally does nothing to improve the site." Hit the nail on the head right there. Just repeating that some of is like the pink. Why are people so opposed to the colour Roll20 has always used as a signature colour, I wonder? I'm only responding because of the assumed universality there - stop claiming you are speaking for everyone. But also the colour is not the only change: the text is larger, and more readable IMO. There are a lot of problems with the change, but the devs are working on them. They fixed the dropdown on the style button between my last post and this one, so progress is being made.

keithcurtis said: Out of curiosity, how did you manage the site the day before yesterday? It had about the same amount of white. The major difference between then and now is that the thread titles are dark gray instead of a medium blue. And the best thing to take away from this is that the work done that temporarily made the site super pink was apparently preparatory to implementing a dark mode that would include the forums. Hopefully that can improve accessibility for lots of folks. Coming up with this explanation made me realize that there probably have been so few calls for improvement to the accessibility before because the site has never actually been all that accessible for the visually impaired to have an impactful population on the site. Perhaps the logic was that people with vision problems wouldn't use Roll20, but that's simply not the case. In a quick ADA review of the Roll20 homepage, I found that few of the images even have Alt Text - same for the hyperlinks. There is more than one kind of light sensitivity and all humans suffer from one very specific form.  Yes, there are people that have sensitivities to white light. Those people have their own valid complaints because of the Dark Mode bugs but that's not the accessibility issue at discussion right now. The light sensitivity that has been exacerbated in the last two days are related to contrasting color values, not specifically "white space." The colors Cyan, Magenta (aka Roll20 Pink) and Yellow are not ADA-approved text color options because their values contrast too greatly with white, grey and black. Black on white or Dark Blue on white (or vice-versa) are much easier for human eyes to capture.  There is a reason why you do not use Stylus to make the text yellow and the background green; Human eyes are not meant for that.

Screenshot with markup The green-checkmarked parts are OK, they're normally branded-pink and/or the Launch color, and the Messages color. Small, highlighted, generic-action commands. The blue circled parts are still messed up. Having main navigation in Pink on white is difficult to see (for me, as some others have said, it is Painful to look at, and this is not uncommon with low vision or astigmatism). This is an Accessibility visual issue.  Having game titles in Pink is another level of cringey because it's really harshly branded in a "pink" feeling. Color is emotional and expressive too. Hot Pink is a very sensational way to typeset our personally-written Game Titles that are individually important to us (game creators). There are very few Book Authors out there, for example, who would accept that color on a book's cover title. There are very few (if any) RPG's or game products that write titles in that color. There are certain niche RPG's that Hot Pink might go nicely with, if the GM chose it, that's great. I don't like that applique' on many game titles that I wrote the wording, because it seems to change the impression of the title itself, as well as being painfully bright. It feels like Roll20 is fingernail-painting my game title. It would be ok if the GM chose pink for a specific game's title, but doesn't feel OK to have Roll20 re-coloring many of my existing grimdark, horror, wargame, mystery, dungeon game titles into such a colorful and emphatically cheerful shade. A neutral text-and-headline color shade (such as Black or standard popular internet Blues), does not force such a bold color impression onto the wording of game titles. Please be more system neutral in design choices and compatibility. Please review again for "Best Practices" towards visual accessibility & disability. Remember not to pinken or distort the parts of Roll20 that the GM-creator-author was able to create with personalization (Titles, Game Cover Art Image, Avatar, Descriptions). People will tend to take that personally because of their authorship.

Gold said: Please be more system neutral in design choices and compatibility. Please be more sensitive to visual ability and disability accessibility. Agreed... I understand that the pink d20 is Roll20's logo, and that's fine. But we don't need to see pink all over the website. We already know we're on Roll20's website, we came here on purpose.

keithcurtis said: Out of curiosity, how did you manage the site the day before yesterday? I'm not 100% sure, though I feel like there was more darker elements? Not to say dark in the truest sense of the word. More that there was more areas which were below the threshold that things become stressful on the eyes. A good example would be campaign frontpages; at the moment simply setting the background to Magic, Matrix or Field helps darken the overall intensity hugely. The center hasn't gotten any less white, but the borders aren't adding to the levels of white on display. If you follow? In short I feel like part of the new change ramped up the lightness of the overall pages.

Adam H. said: Can we get a fix for the compendium information not being properly sized inside things like the charactermancer, it is inconvenient having to resize the window massively to fit it all on without horizontally scrolling. The scrollbar now also clips over the text below it which just further compounds the issue. Not only the scrollbar... EVERY element there on the VTT is displayed in front of character sheets / handouts etc... The complaint is there and I hope they will change this sometime!

The Foegetter said: As a web designer, I do not wait until the very end of the day to publish changes and certainly do not just walk away without seeing if there are any issues. What does happen though, is management telling designers that everything will just blow over and to publish the changes regardless. The same thing happened with the Dark Mode update; The changes went live and was riddled with bugs. Instead of rolling back the update and improving it for a better re-release, they kept the bad changes live until implementing a fix for the fix. There is no reason for Users to have to deal with a bad site update when there should always be a snapshot to fall back onto. I could not have said it any better! @Roll20 please don't treat us paying customers as Guinea Pigs for your - often untested (for whatever reason) updates! THX

Thank you for changing things back, while I agree there are still a few things like game names in pink that I'm not sure really benefit from that colour it is far better than yesterday. Unfortunately I have a feeling that there may be far more eye conditions out there than many people realise and what suits one person doesn't necessarily suit another.  I'm another that is partially sighted, but for me, high contrast, high saturation text on a pale background works best, while black on white is the most obvious choice, black on pale grey can work.  There is one forum I visit that uses a very dark purple, almost a black on a pale blue/purple background, it sounds dreadful when you say it, but it is one of the most restful colour schemes i have come across.  For the most part Dark Mode is hopeless for me, but there is something about Discords colour scheme that makes it work.  i have a feeling there is a lot about vision and how the mind interprets things that scientist still don't know. In the end i guess the best option would be for a sight to let us choose a colour scheme, but i would imagine that would take a lot of programming to do, and would probably introduce far more bugs than it would be worth.

Please just roll back the latest software update you did. It doesn't help anyone and only alienates people!

GiGs said: Daniel S. said: "No one wants  ANY  pink. Your paying customers would like the site reverted back to the way it was. What is the logic behind this change? Having pink links or hover-over pink does not help make your brand. If anything it's going to drive people away. It literally does nothing to improve the site." Hit the nail on the head right there. Just repeating that some of is like the pink. Why are people so opposed to the colour Roll20 has always used as a signature colour, I wonder? I'm only responding because of the assumed universality there - stop claiming you are speaking for everyone. But also the colour is not the only change: the text is larger, and more readable IMO. There are a lot of problems with the change, but the devs are working on them. They fixed the dropdown on the style button between my last post and this one, so progress is being made. Yes, they changed a few things: - Font and size in the Roll20 Header (Top Navigation) etc. [I BELIEVE that it is the same font they used for their DnD 5E Sheet for Darkmode] - Color from black to pink... As for the links in the forums it'd be nice if the Threads that have NEW Content would be printed in Bold or something like it OR just the pinned ones with the flags, though t he recent changes for the forum are a relief. As for the Header... yes, pink is their color and yes, it is used all over the site. I do not have a problem with that, though I gotta say another color for the top navigation would be nice to have (Black / Blue) even for darkmode with the feint purple being used in VTT. As for the subnavigation, those links where pink before and they can stay that way imo. But to be greeted with that pink header is not the greatest thing and imo does not look that good!

One more thing I just noticed: Have these buttons always been this big and always been in this location? What about for NON-Pro users who don't have this custom sheet sandbox? Would it be possible to either make the buttons smaller or increase the distance to the "Upcoming Games" area? Right now it looks cramped and NOT really that good tbh! AND these need to be addressed as well: a) When editing a post the purple outline is back: b) When uploading / inserting an image: c) green Icon still overlapping username: d) Missing outlines on pages (actual page) and missing contrast (grey font on light grey background):

Yep, Roll20, this pink is a goddamn bad decision. I can't work with this either. 

TheMarkus1204 said: I could not have said it any better! @Roll20 please don't treat us paying customers as Guinea Pigs for your - often untested (for whatever reason) updates! THX It's not just the paying customers. Changes like this affect everyone. They do have the DEV system, which lets paying customers opt-in to be guinea pigs, but they rarely use it appropriately.

Instead of a neutral site for gaming campaigns, we all basically have a forced, cyberpunk aesthetic now. So after merging with Onebookshelf, this is what you come up with to present a new vibe? SMH.

The intense white and hot pink is an extreme eye sore in my opinion and should be addressed. dark mode for the entire website would be good... Text needs to be visible/readable too. Thanks for consideration.  

Absolutely NO Contrast in Marketplace since recent update: It is just white with the text on it... No borders, nothing! In this state it is REALLY hard to look at! As for the top navigation: it is far more spread in the marketplace layout... either let the rest of the site use THAT marketplace template OR edit the marketplace template to fit the rest of the site. Right now, just looking at it causes headaches because you can not really focus! (At least the links in the left bar are not pink fwiw)

I'm very happy to hear the Dev team is working on our feedback to this so quickly. Thanks a bunch guys! Drespar said: Hey everyone, As folks have noticed, we were in the midst of pushing out updates and changes to address key feedback items. Below is the list of what's changed: Forum title links on the main forum page has been changed. It will now only show color on hover. Updated reply links to gray color with pink highlight on hover Updated the "new post/reply" in forum -- the WYSIWYG editor to remove the pink outline On the campaign details, the profile box in the top right is no longer all pink text Fixed the page drop down menu in the VTT so there is no longer a white background Thank you everyone for the feedback thus far and your patience while we were addressing things directly. We believe these changes handle some of the biggest issues folks were mentioning. We are still going to be keeping watch on this thread and other channels for other areas that need addressed in addition to addressing a few items still outstanding. Please feel free to continue providing feedback on areas that you believe need addressed

I find the new color scheme awful, simply because I do not like pink. That put aside, I am struggling to see links I've created in my handouts, as they now are a very light shade of grey on white... Please revert to the old color scheme, or let us choose (from some color scheme sets, by all means) which color scheme we want to use.  I also notice the UI in general has changed for the worse, e.g., the messages icon is now only a grey square "blob", rather than an envelope... :-(

Glad to see some improvement to the forums styling on this. I think 'gold's post is very helpful. The occasional pink link can be good and provide some contrast. It's the overabundance that's the issue.  Looks like the campaign page and top links are all still largely hot pink. But progress is progress.

Still with the bright magenta everywhere? I know that having oceans of white space is a popular design, but at least the dark blue buttons and links from before this change helped to tone down the brightness. Now they've gone to what looks like a finer-lined font and turned the text gray (not here in the messages, but on most other pages), which allows even more of the bright white to shine through. It's like staring into a light fixture. As for this shade being part of the Roll20 logo: Your logo now just fades into this sea of hot pink. If anything, you're diluting your brand. How about running your design choices past a committee before inflicting them on your members, or at least someone with knowledge of design.

Dio G. said: keithcurtis said: Out of curiosity, how did you manage the site the day before yesterday? I'm not 100% sure, though I feel like there was more darker elements? Not to say dark in the truest sense of the word. More that there was more areas which were below the threshold that things become stressful on the eyes. A good example would be campaign frontpages; at the moment simply setting the background to Magic, Matrix or Field helps darken the overall intensity hugely. The center hasn't gotten any less white, but the borders aren't adding to the levels of white on display. If you follow? In short I feel like part of the new change ramped up the lightness of the overall pages. Excellent explanation, Dio G. This exactly explains my situation as well.

I'm with a lot of people on this. The forums are fine but when I'm on my home page/game page I struggle a lot. This will likely change with dark mode, but I have issues with the contrast between bright pink on white due to sight issues and chronic migraines. Even if the color was darker but still in the same vein as the main logo it would likely be fine and still get the branding across. Unfortunately the brightness of everything as is makes this an accessibility issue more than a cosmetic issue. 

Sorry Roll20, the new "look" is awful, hurts my eyes, and makes me want to spend less time on the site. Fix it. Seriously.

The font choices are terrible, and my eyes have begun to ache after a few minutes. After being here for about a decade, I have to stop using the site until the font and colors are fixed. 

I suffer from migraines and this new change triggers one quickly.  Currently Roll20 is unusable to me in this current state.  A friend of mine told me I could find and extension to change them so I will give that a chance but I get a limited amount of time trying as it only takes a minute or two before the migraine starts and after that I'm out for a day. My feedback would be to provide choices for those that wish other colors or like the new scheme. 

How do I turn off this nauseating pink color? The original blue color of the was easy on the eyes, the pink is not.  How do I change this default? (The submit post button, the top bar, all of the pink is terrible to look at).  I note that I am not the only one providing feedback that this color choice is terrible. Can we get some relief, please? 

I'm with Rich on the migraines.  Mine don't start nearly as quick but this...Magenta Mess definitely is not comfortable to look at and I have to keep the tab largely closed during play or else I will wind up with a migraine after awhile.

Count me as someone who cannot stand the bright pink look of the interface. It is actually painful to try to read somethings. Please restore the old version of color, because this is a (literal) game breaker.

Drespar said: Please feel free to continue providing feedback on areas that you believe need addressed. Nobody wants all the pink.  for your title, fine.  But for everything else it should be Black text with bolded / italicized / whatever font changes. Please remove the pink, or provide an easy way (like a switch!) to return your site to a readable state. Thank You.

I switched to another system a month ago and I just come back here from time to time to check things I missed in the transfer. This change and the way it’s handled so completely exemplifies why I made the move despite having thousands of dollars invested here. For almost two years now, I had issues with the simple fog of war that hides instead of reveals 50% of the time, probably a very simple fix. But this is where the priorities lie. The pepto bismol update. Breaking more and more things that work, and not reverting to previous version, making everyone suffer for weeks and months until you get back to a tolerable level. I’m just posting this in case it’s useful for an inevitable post-mortem in the future when you wonder why people left.