Interface Alterations

[FireFrenzy]

I noted this fragment from a post by Devari:

As an aside, I'd really like to see the interface designed into a more modern-looking ("pretty") layout. Maybe even throw some graphics into the mix. People have a short attention span, so prettiness might grab them better; then, features and game-play come into play. As it stands, FAF looks pretty dull and technical - perhaps we can make it more pretty and exciting.

First, I believe that a game can only be as good as the ideas behind it. From what I see, ideas here are far from lacking. However, akin to this, the game can only reach its full appeal if it is aesthetically pleasing, in addition to sporting appealing game-play. Likewise, when gauging how to make a game user-friendly, I consider the look of the game just as important as the game itself.

As an extremely new member of this community, I can definitely recall my first-impressions. However, after mucking with the code -- which has an excellent template -- I have some suggestions which should be rather menial to implement. These aren't criticisms, but rather suggestions to improve the game's general aesthetics. There are active suggestions being tossed around on how to improve the game; I also feel that there should be active suggestions being discussed on how to improve the feel game. I don't pretend to be a decorator, but, of course, I have my opinions. As all of you do too, this is obviously something in which community input would be preferable:

On the main page:
I think that creating a more custom background would be preferable. Currently, it is obviously a tiled background; the first impression one gets from tiled backgrounds, at least mine, are associated excessive hurriedness, and lack of attention to detail. While, I can attest that this is quite contrary to the actual community, this is part of the initial impression one may get. Perhaps a background that more accommodates the FAF logo would be more aesthetic. Additionally, I'd consider replacing the current server names with images, which could retain further visual appeal. Moreover, if the global login is not being used, it should be commented-out.

For the game itself:
One of the elements of good GUI design is numerous options, with few available on the surface. The logic is that people new to the presentation may be overwhelmed by the initial display of numerous options from which to choose. Likewise, limiting the primary display to only most useful options is preferable. Don't misinterpret my meaning: maintain complexity. Simply reduce the appearance of such.

For starters, the options which are unavailable should not be displayed (i.e., one shouldn't be able to see the 'Market', 'Attack', etc. options while in protection). Additionally, perhaps consolidate 'Trade', 'Farm', 'Train', and 'Write' into one menu.

Make a theme of particularly complimentary colors: everyone knows that certain combinations of colors are more appealing than others. Also, perhaps add texture to the rows, to accomplish a more "natural" feel. And pay close attention to the clan forums: in my opinion, any place in which players interact should be very aesthetically pleasing, as interaction is a fundamental goal of this game.

Perhaps replace the server name, as well as the "FAF," with pictures – maybe replacing the FAF with a logo. Also, the current menu's gray backgrounds (sidefade.gif and sideunderfade.gif are likely not needed); centering the header text in the menu would also be more pleasing, accommodating greater symmetry.

Additionally, I think that your collapsible toggle is quite neat, so I'll simply mention this as an alternative, but far from any steadfast preference: Perhaps separate the general playing interface from other options. That is, separate the 'Forums', 'Game Guide,' and 'Logout' from the general area where people spend time looking. I suggest moving them into a single row up-top, above the main row of information, and separate them from the main menu.

Finally, I realize that the current setup is likely streamlined for speed. Likewise, if connection speed is an issue for some players, make alternative templates with less detail, which they can then choose. Nowadays, I expect, most players haven't that issue, and likewise, the game layout shouldn't be restricted by such.

I think that those are the primary things. Again, these are not criticisms of the present display, but merely suggestions: like with anything, there is always room for improvement. Coming from a completely different community, as well as harboring my own ideas, I figure -- and hope -- that I may have some insights not typically considered.

[bjornredtail]

Combining all the 'civil' turn uses (ie, train, write, etc.) into one sidebar option would slow the player down, particularly if it is done serverside. The player would have to load "use turns" page, then load page with the activity they actually wanted to do.

One idea would be to put half the sidebar one one side of the page, half on the other, so that all options are visible without scrolling. A more condensed UI, at the cost of looking a bit more cluttered.

[The Beatles]

That's the approach FF takes on his game. Some options, as he writes, are on the top, and some are on the right.

Thanks for your suggestions. I'm unfortunately worthless at design, and I do wish we had more people on the team with design experience or ideas. Currently, I think, only Bjorn, Slasher and Devari know anything about the topic. Bjorn designed the logo (isn't it a lovely one?) by the way. Trouble is, few of these people actively muck about with the game design.

I think what FF meant for the various turn uses is that they could all have forms on one page. In fact, there could be one form, but with a drop-down menu. Or there could be one form, but different buttons for the different actions.

[FireFrenzy]

Combining all the 'civil' turn uses (ie, train, write, etc.) into one sidebar option would slow the player down, particularly if it is done serverside. The player would have to load "use turns" page, then load page with the activity they actually wanted to do.

This is all true. When considering approaches to my GUI design, I've skimmed the web, joining various text-based games so to get a feel for the variety of looks.

I know that Valhall Promisance uses all of the options on one page. While their attempt could be less cluttered, it is markedly efficient. Additionally, if I've seen games separate them onto distinct pages; this is what I do, though I admit that I am looking to fine-tune the display.

[The Beatles]

So what about the option I suggested: one page, multiple buttons? It's still exactly as many clicks as now, but a less cluttered sidebar.

[FireFrenzy]

I (personally) agree, and that was what I initially tried. The only objection I have to that is that one has to scroll, and I've been trying to minimize scrolling, as the navigation menu doesn't scroll down with the screen. But if I can't find a better way, I'll likely be going that route. And perhaps scrolling could be eliminated if they were placed in two rows of two -- I haven't fiddled around with it too much -- though I'm not sure how that'd affect the aesthetics.

As for the double sidebar, that is what I use. Here's a photo side-by-side: If people prefer it over the long menu, it's an easy implementation, along with most anything else I've done -- and I'd be happy to do any of them:

[img]http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/4671/sbslp3.th.jpg[/img]

EDIT: Made it a thumb for obvious reasons.

[The Beatles]

As I mentioned to you, feel free to make any minor interface alterations, and just poll around for major ones. The playerbase is fairly used to changes, and if people don't like something, they'll complain about it anyway. So make changes, as the players like it as bonus.

Specifically, I'm thinking of the nifty stylesheet. The images for clans, prizes, kills, etc. are nice (Turock had one for active users, I think that's in the code right now), but they make the listings wider-spaced, so I'd prefer smaller images that are in line with the text with default font sizes on the major browsers. But you've made other nice alterations too, like moving to eras directly, etc.

[FireFrenzy]

Gotcha, I think I know what you mean: take a quick peak at the 'Top Players' link for the Alliance server on my main page (here). I've got the images (expect for race) there, just smaller, for the particular reason you noted: maintaining small margins. Is that about the size you're thinking?

[FireFrenzy]

Ah, and one more question, simply related to your previous post, Beatles:

I noticed Turock's game (Medieval Empires, I believe) among the recommended games you stickied on the General Discussion forum. I was interested to see the result of his work, however, I notice I am unable to sign-up. Do you know: has he closed/disabled sign-ups, or is there an alternate method?

[The Beatles]

Yes, rather, that size looks great.

I haven't logged in to ME in some time, so you'd best ask Arthus, I think he plays it regularly. The signup method ought to be much the same as here, except for some minor variation with passwords.

[Turock]

Sign ups are currently open. The sets running now are open still for a few more weeks, Sep 1st.

You guys pass me off as dead already? *laughs*!

[The Beatles]

Heh, not at all. I was thinking ME'd be the perfect test case for a market (a beta game perhaps) when we finish it and if you're willing to devote a beta game to it. But that's still yonks away.

[Zephyrus]

Shininess is definitely a very nice thing to have, so long as it doesn't hamper gameplay. The game shouldn't be any slower for having pretty icons. If anything, a more graphical approach should make it easier to play the game, for example identifying key information. I'd hope that as far as priorities go, gameplay goes over aesthetics, because in the end, that's what we play for. (Else, we'd have moved on to WoW for example.)

A shiny main page is a definite plus. It's a great first impression, and what's more, it's pretty safe to do as we only need to use it once per login. I mean, don't go overboard. Fast page loads are a good thing, definitely. But I don't think there'd be objections to giving it more visual appeal.

As far as limiting the display, I would disagree. We shouldn't under-sell the game's features, and we shouldn't make it any more difficult for veterans. Unavailable options could be grayed out or something, but it's important to let new players know they are there. Consolidating basic turn use into one menu, something called work or similar, and then letting users choose their commodity to apply a bonus to, is a good idea.

Themes are a nice add-on. We can always make a new one without disturbing the existing ones. And CSS doesn't take much time. As far as the default theme goes, I'd personally prefer dark over light, not only out of habit but because this is a war game after all.

I am all for making big buttons for more vital things, especially GUIDE and FORUMS, two lifesavers for any new player. Speaking of which, we never overhauled the guide like we planned. We need a players' wiki.

It's not even just speed, although that was a focus of the original Promisance. Simplicity makes gameplay more easily accessible, and makes the game more about actual strategy.

[FireFrenzy]

My simplification of the modes of production. I borrowed the idea of "Stop Turns If" from Redwall: Warlords. Simply posting to gauge opinion: 'yes' or 'no' to either implementations?



All the best.

[The Beatles]

Looks great; a yes vote from me.