Fear: UIv2

[Sensuki]

UI Version 2: What did Obsidian do? Hopefully not this!

 

Another thread because I'm bored. Also another speculation.

 

I have made another mockup UI based on what I think Obsidian would have done to achieve their goals, based on a couple of recent-ish statements.

 

Objective #1: Use up less screen space overall.

 

This is something that they stated they were going to do, make the UI smaller. This is something I wouldn't necessarily agree with unless it was trimming a little bit of vertical space that they could have spared from the original. In my opinion there is absolutely no point in not using up the total width of the screen for an IWD style UI as it allows you more space to make use of functionality (such as extra action bar buttons, quick item buttons etc). It is possible that this is exactly what they did.

However the unfortunate fans of minimalistic UI's probably influenced this decision a little bit.

 

(Assumed) Objective #2: Make portraits slightly larger

 

In a recent thread Josh Sawyer posted the current portrait size in the main HUD - 73x86, which is slightly bigger than the version seen in UIv1. It may be that the portrait size is bigger but is cropped or shrunk by the UI to fit in the same tiny portrait windows featured in UIv1, but for this mockup I assumed they were bigger.

 

Objective 3: Remove Dead Space

 

Self explanatory. After shrinking the space, make use of available space in the UI. Less amounts of fancy pillars and superfluous art-y stuff like that.

 

Worst Case Result:

 

 

Vertical space cannot really be shrunk any more than this, unless the portrait size (73x86) or icon size (32x32) was made smaller. Room for status effects has, however disappeared. Not sure how they are going to be handled unless they make them tiny icons on the portraits or something.

 

Horizontal space has been shrunk to only include necessary menu elements. It is possible that the menu size could be reduced even further and the left side of the UI with the portraits expanded a bit further to include some more action bar slots. I am not sure how things like skill use, guard interface, formation buttons and all of that are being handled in Eternity.

 

This is however, exactly what I hope they HAVE NOT done regarding the UI for the game. You do not need to see the bits of the map to the sides of the UI because you will never ever be focusing down there or need to see characters beneath the UI height on the screen.

Latest RockPaperSh*tGun article on the mega dungeon however was promising in that they've rejected the minimalists and kept the skeuomorphic, Baldur's Gate style, but I can't help but fear that we've lost some horizontal space that could be used.

 

Hopefully this is not what was done for the second version!

Edited December 11, 2013 by Sensuki

[Boox]

This is however, exactly what I hope they HAVE NOT done regarding the UI for the game. You do not need to see the bits of the map to the sides of the UI because you will never ever be focusing down there or need to see characters beneath the UI height on the screen.

Latest RockPaperSh*tGun article on the mega dungeon however was promising in that they've rejected the minimalists and kept the skeuomorphic, Baldur's Gate style, but I can't help but fear that we've lost some horizontal space that could be used.

 

Hopefully this is not what was done for the second version!

I agree with you on this issue, Sensuki, especially on the point that there is no reason for the UI not to stretch the entire width of the screen for exactly the reason you mentioned. Seeing just that much more of the game world (for lack of a better term) won't benefit the player in any meaningful way. Personally, I think that it detracts from the gaming and UI experiences. I wouldn't call chopping off bits and pieces for no reason good design. I agree with Josh (or was it Adam) that the solidity of the IE UIs was one of their strong points. The worst case result you posted is proof to me that such a minimalist design doesn't play to those strengths.

[Hassat Hunter]

Well, you know, you COULD take away the combat log out of the fixed UI.

 

It's what BG did good, and IWD2 did absolutely attrociously bad.

 

For the rest, I also hope no 'floaters'... the "blue and red line" still look horrible (what was wrong with the redening picture of the IE games) though I'm not sure actual OE footage had that too.

[Karkarov]

I don't know, do I have to link my mock up again which includes all the elements found in every Infinity engine game, still has artistic elements, but still takes up less screen space than even the UI you just posted?

 

I really don't understand how you guys think a block of static art enhances a UI.  It doesn't it detracts from it.  A UI is about function, and if part of the UI has no actual function than it is superfluous plain and simple. Even playing BG2 again recently I see even less point in the "big box of text" than I used to.  I always minimize it to one line and only ever open it when I have paused and want to verify a weapon isn't working and what damage type is, or find out why a character went from 100% health to dead in like 3 seconds, and of course most often... just cause I want to know how much exp the thing I just killed was worth.  Needless to say I am not finding myself using the combat log all that much.  Knowing I missed because the RNG said I rolled a 1 doesn't help me anymore than knowing I missed because I rolled 2, all that matters is I missed and I can tell that happened cause the goblin is still standing there.

 

In other news I do find your stats on portrait size pretty interesting.  I say this because in the final mock up of my UI from way back I made the portraits what I felt would be the "optimal" size for the game.  Turns out the current portrait specs are exactly 3 pixels wider and 1 pixel taller than my best guess was.  Neato.

 

Oh yeah buffs is simple by the way.  You just create a universal "buffs/debuffs" icon that lights up a certain color.  One color means you have buffs, one means you have debuffs, the other means you have both.  Say blue, red, and purple.  A simple mouse over and wait 1-2 seconds and up comes a full list of all the status effects in a pop up window.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Karkarov

[Boox]

I really don't understand how you guys think a block of static art enhances a UI.  It doesn't it detracts from it.  A UI is about function, and if part of the UI has no actual function than it is superfluous plain and simple. Even playing BG2 again recently I see even less point in the "big box of text" than I used to.

I should have been more clear. I was talking about the aesthetics and mood created by the UI, not its ergonomics or the functional experience. In my opinion, the UI is not just about function as it plays a major part in creating the mood and feel of the game. Therefore, it is isn't sufficient to only consider the technical side in the design. Function is very important, of course, but in order to "capture the spirit" of the IE games (i.e. reach the goal of the project) I think it's justified to sacrifice optimal efficiency for a holistically more balanced design. I don't see why the UI shouldn't be both functional and artistic.

[Sensuki]

I don't know, do I have to link my mock up again which includes all the elements found in every Infinity engine game, still has artistic elements, but still takes up less screen space than even the UI you just posted?

I thought your UI was atrocious (though you can into photoshop). Take that with a grain of salt. You also don't left align a UI. You center it, or it takes up the whole screen.

 

Obsidian did say that there would be two collapsable sides to the UI, so it is possible that they've done something even worse than what I did here and have a UI section on the left and one on the right. That would have me pulling my hair out for sure. Hopefully it still takes up the entire width of the screen.

 

And the combat log is very important, just because you use it (I believe you belong to the "insignificant" portion of minimalist UI fans), it doesn't mean that there aren't A LOT of people who use it all the time.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[neo6874]

On one hand, I like the UI staying out of the way ... 

 

But on the other, I actually like the (general) "dominating" UI design of the IE games ... it kinda reminds me of actually playing a PnP game -- game "board" in the center, with 3+ players, and one ****-dm* with their character sheets, folders, dice, spell lists, more dice, etc. surrounding them.

 

 

*curse you profanity filter!

Edited December 12, 2013 by neo6874

[Sensuki]

For the record here is your mockup:

Looks pretty. That's about it.



Here is my Fear of UIv2 in Segregated Mode, aply titled Retard UI 101



What is the point of such a large gap between the UI sides? What is the point of any gap? There isn't one, unless you count wanting appease QQers who don't like skeuomorphic UIs in the first place.

This is a waste of space that could be used by the UI to provide functionality which seems to be the key word that you have been using. There is no reason AT ALL to count this as freed space because YOU WILL NEVER USE that space. You will never be focusing on anything below the height of the bottom UI on the screen, therefore there is no reason why you would need to see that part of the map. It is much better off taking up the entire width of the screen with the UI to allow room for extra buttons and functionality rather than compressing yourself to a stupid aligned design like that, just to appease people like you. If you collapse the dialogue/combat log then the UI just looks jarring on the one side.

 

It is not about the "UI looking pretty". You could use that space for extra buttons, and all sorts of stuff and STILL have the UI collapsable on either side.

 

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[lolaldanee]

for the record: karkarov's mockup is fantastic

heavyweight feeling, yet out of the way

credit where credit is due

[Sensuki]

Out of the way = terrible. Especially hidden off in the corner like that.

 

It's not big enough to provide the functionality required in this game, of which to compensate they're going to have to use popups and floating menus which is absolutely horrible, when you could fix this problem by using dead space on the screen and adding it to the UI.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[lolaldanee]

it's all a matter of taste, nothing more

and i for one like my screen to be clear of anyhing not needed all the time, and to only have it there once it is really needed

 

i've played raides in the rather complex mmo vangurad (and a raid being a situation where you need to look at a LOT of buttons, icons, and health bars) without any problem using this UI layout

 

edit: added a second screenshot showing pretty much the absolute maximum of stuff that ever could be on my screen

Edited December 12, 2013 by lolaldanee

[Sensuki]

That UI you linked makes me die inside.

 

However it is also farily typical of an MMO - as the transparent design is popular there.

 

Not for an IE style game though.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[coffeetable]

karkarov's mockup is great, sensuki is wrong, gas thread ban op

[C2B]

I'm with sensuki, though I don't have as much fear.

[neo6874]

As stated elsewhere, I'm not so much "afraid" of what Obsidian will do ... but if I don't at least have the option for something like this

 

 

Then I will be disappoint.

 

Edit to clarify --> really the option to have a UI that surrounds the "Map" (bonus points if it makes things bigger and/or allows me to move stuff around, so it's not all cramped on the one horizontal bar at the bottom).

 

Floaty UIs are nice when it's there as a reminder -- "Spell/Ability slot 'A' is Magic Missile", but with "play as the party" style games, I like it feeling a little more solid.

Edited December 12, 2013 by neo6874

[Sensuki]

karkarov's mockup is great, sensuki is wrong, gas thread ban op

 

This guy trolls me across three forums, take his posts with a grain of salt. Pretty easy to antagonize people on the Codex

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[coffeetable]

you linked the thread from the codex looking for support

 

here i am. supporting you.

[Greensleeve]

I think Karakov's UI looks pretty great. Fits with the map in question, seems to have all the buttons and logs I would want. 

 

The first UI Sensuki posted was quite decent also, but the lack of stuff on the sides made it look pretty bad. The one posted with the gap in the middle was even worse, but that's more due to the look of the UI in question than about the existence of the gap in of itself. 

[Sensuki]

 

 

 

I think Karakov's UI looks pretty great. Fits with the map in question, seems to have all the buttons and logs I would want.

 

The first UI Sensuki posted was quite decent also, but the lack of stuff on the sides made it look pretty bad. The one posted with the gap in the middle was even worse, but that's more due to the look of the UI in question than about the existence of the gap in of itself.

Karkarov's has a gap in the middle. Just because it looks nice doesn't mean it's good. Obsidian will need more space than what he has in his, so the gap in the middle will be smaller and probably more like the one I made.

 

Which is pretty darn stupid IMO. I don't know why people are so pedantic about a skeuomorphic UI that takes up X vertical pixels and want to cut it in half so they can see a trivial amount of space between the parts of the UI ... space that they are never going to use.

 

It's much better to take up the whole length of the screen and have the two parts collapsible. The person who collapses the combat log (Karkarov) gets a silly left sided UI when they do that though.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[Gumbercules]

I vote against having any small gaps in the UI. Gaps are only useful or relevant in games with a fluid, rotating camera. In those cases, the expectation is that you'll be moving the camera around and the little snippets of game world that you view through the gaps will add up in your mind and create a larger viewing area. For a stiffer camera that can only pan (and zoom somewhat I guess), gaps only serve to remind you that the UI is blocking part of the game world.

 

Larger gaps, like in Karkarov's mockup are OK I guess. I'm not a fan but neither would I get angry if that ended up being the final result. But smaller gaps like the ones in Sensuki's scare mockups are terrible and pointless and should be filled in, even if it's just with filler art.

[Karkarov]

Okay I am going to throw a few things out there. 

 

1: Screen real estate in any form of action or strategy game is of prime importance and pretty much everyone centers their screen on their characters.  This means center screen space is the most important space.  Hence why a center based UI is "not" a good idea. 

 

2: Most people are right handed.  Right handed people have an easier time moving the mouse from the right to the left and a harder time moving from left to right.  Hence the UI was designed to be left aligned.

 

3: Yes you could say my UI is "pretty" but that's because everyone complained my original mockup was too plain and had all straight lines.  So I did a more artistic version.

 

4: Everything is placed in one spot BECAUSE you want it out of the way.  You don't want your UI getting in the way of the game, it is just plain bad design.  Additionally it means all the most important and key functions are all near each other which means when you do need to manipulate the UI it takes a minimal amount of mouse movement to do so.

[Sensuki]

I vote against having any small gaps in the UI.

Let me put some fear into you.

 

 

Okay I am going to throw a few things out there.

 

1: Screen real estate in any form of action or strategy game is of prime importance and pretty much everyone centers their screen on their characters. This means center screen space is the most important space. Hence why a center based UI is "not" a good idea.

 

2: Most people are right handed. Right handed people have an easier time moving the mouse from the right to the left and a harder time moving from left to right. Hence the UI was designed to be left aligned.

 

3: Yes you could say my UI is "pretty" but that's because everyone complained my original mockup was too plain and had all straight lines. So I did a more artistic version.

 

4: Everything is placed in one spot BECAUSE you want it out of the way. You don't want your UI getting in the way of the game, it is just plain bad design. Additionally it means all the most important and key functions are all near each other which means when you do need to manipulate the UI it takes a minimal amount of mouse movement to do so.

Lmao, you are just copying what J.E. Sawyer says.

 

1: Screen real estate is important, but in a game with a skeuomorphic UI that takes up a certain amount of vertical pixels and then protrudes along the screen if you leave a gap between two UI elements that is essentially wasting space, because you will never look down there and you will never position the screen so you can see anything in the gap between the UI elements.

 

Nearly all strategy games have a skeuomorphic UI that takes up THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE SCREEN.

 

2: That is an exact copy paste of something J.E. Sawyer said. I am not sure what he is basing that information on either. Problem is with interactive stuff you are making two movements - right to left(to select the UI element) and then left to right to select your target element - so either way you have to make both movements, in the case of a right-aligned design this would be exactly the same, yet reversed.

 

The reason why stuff is left aligned in program design, web and even objects in film (a good example - in Game of Thrones, Sandor Clegane's burned face was altered from left to right side of his face, so it was on the right side of his face) is because people pay more attention to things on their right.

 

This fact could even be used in favor of putting the dialogue/combat log on the left because the information on it is constantly changing, and people would pay more attention to it on the left. This is the reason why I think Fallout Tactics opted for that design.

 

Also if you watch the majority of FPS players who have low mouse sensitivity - what direction do they naturally make turns in ? Left to Right, actually. They flick their mouse from the left side of the mouse pad, and then re-position it back to the left side.

 

3: Irrelevant. I cannot photoshop stuff. I am just saying that I think a lot of people like your UI because it looks nice.

 

4: The original IE game UI never got in the way of the game because all UI elements are contained WITHIN the UI. Your design promotes floating windows and popups, and does not have enough space for buttons such as the guard interface, skill use and all of those things that were included in the Infinity Engine games without chopping into the Action bar buttons. These buttons are needed particularly for MAC users who only have a one button mouse.

 

I am not promoting space for space's sake. I am promoting using up ALL of the available dead space on the screen for interactive UI elements. It makes the UI much more elegant and useful and complete. You are trying to get rid of the UI for some weird reason and plan to collapse at least one half of it anyway, so I can see why you want it to be smaller.

 

I would say too bad.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Sensuki

[Prometheus]

I think Karkarovs buttons are to small, it would be difficult to see what icon is for what spell.

 

Wouldn't it possible to make a place for extra buttons in the middle you can collapse if you don't need them?

[Gumbercules]

Where is this idea that UIs should keep the bottom center free coming from? I've been looking at UIs for various recent RPGs and strategy games just now and virtually none of them follow this supposed rule. Not only are skeuomorphic UIs more common than I had remembered, even in recent games, but even those that aren't still usually plonk some key UI element on the bottom center of the screen.

[Sensuki]

It's not *terrible* in some games - Titan Quest and Grim Dawn it works fine. But all you really need for that is an action bar.

 

But yeah for strategy games its like wtffffffffffff