Two UX Disasters That I Love to Hate.
I have to admit that I was very excited to write this article. Finally, someone is asking me to complain about some things that have really been grinding my UX gears, and I am happy to oblige. For the sake of dissection, I am going to refer to Jakob Nielsen’s 10 Usability Heuristics.
I am feeling pretty salty today, so I’m not going to hold back: this app is nothing short of a dumpster fire. As a designer, I have made things before, too, and of course they have not been perfect. They may not have even been good at times. But, did I publish those things and heavily advertise them to put other people through the misery of trying to enjoy them? NO.

About a week ago, I saw an ad for a game that I thought looked like a decent time-waster. It is called ServeIt, a free game which seemed simple enough from the demo: all you need to do is balance a tray of objects and deliver them to people. Many of the best time-wasters are based off of a simple premise like this, so I thought I would give it a whirl.
Man, do I wish I had taken screengrabs of this game the first time I attempted to play it, before the update (which sort of gave some instructions) was implemented…luckily the update was only a minor improvement and I am still able to provide some proof that this is nearly impossible to play.
The first time I tried it, there were literally no instructions. The game opens with a tray full of stuff…when you touch the screen, your tray starts to move…everything flails around and falls to the ground…you lose…it starts again. That was the whole game. I do not exaggerate when I say that I wasted quite a bit of time trying to figure this game out.
No instructions. No feedback. No logical gameplay. No response when you touch the screen…basically a glorified video to make you feel like a failure.
Enter August 31st update: we now have a couple of instructions!


Alas, literally everything else that I said about it initially still holds true. I can kind of balance the tray now…but I still have no control over where it goes. They did, however add in my beloved *haptics*…but they just buzz for no apparent reason, whether your tray is stable or you have dumped your milkshakes all over the floor.



Now, let me tell you a little bit about this thing. This thing is a cute Hello Kitty-themed kitchen which was purchased for my young niece. Seems innocent enough…

This thing is missing key pieces. Because why should what’s on the box be consistent with the contents inside it?
This thing has selective feedback. It makes sound when you touch the burner. Or, it doesn’t make sound when you touch the burner. Or, it makes sound whenever it apparently feels like it.
This thing has ridiculous proportions, even for a toy. Do you need to be able to put pans in a sink? I guess not. Should a crevice that is possibly a refrigerator be able to store anything? I guess not.



I am relatively happy to ignore any violations of aesthetic and efficiency heuristics—it is a toy, after all—but my biggest gripe with this thing is that it gleefully disregards real-world logic. For young children, what seems like innocent play in fact teaches them things such as motor skills, lessons of cause-and-effect, problem-solving, and how to use tools.

So, guess who knows how to *almost* turn on the stovetop, now? Luckily, it’s a gas range burner, which means that *almost* turning it on will just result in a plentiful release of gas which definitely is not dangerous…¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Better yet, guess who is rewarded with feedback when she puts her hands on these adorable burners?
The same little girl who loves to touch, turn, and poke EVERYLITTLETHING in the real world. When it comes to effective UX, sometimes it is a matter of knowing how to read the room that you are designing for, and unfortunately, this toy just seems to want to burn the room down.
