RE: saddened by poor interface

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: saddened by poor interface

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: saddened by poor interface

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 9:57:48 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, Aircraft upgrade paths are not hard coded. They are set by the scenario designer in the editor. It is easy to change the paths. What cannot be done is change paths in a game.
Also you cannot go backwards (return to a type after you've upgraded)

This most likely has to do with the AI's handling of groups and production.

I don't see why in a two human game there is any need for a path at all. (Other then remaining within a class of aircraft)

Can we put this on the wish list? (Is it hard to program "ignore all upgrade paths"? But as a side effect the human allied player would need to gain control of his aircraft production (currently it reflects the upgrade paths) So it looks more major then in sounds.

My prefered method would be start with the existing airgroups and from then on have the players generate them as they want. Check aircraft in pool, pilots in pool, go to airgroup creation menu and create an airgroup. It enters training and emerges at the proper time at a specific Home Airfield. Minor nations get their airgroups in the current fashion.

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 121

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 9:58:37 PM

carnifex

Posts: 1295
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Latitude 40� 48' 43N Longtitude 74� 7' 29W
Status: offline

Here is an example of where the interface could use a major help.

Tiny buttons make my head hurt. Literally. And I have perfect eyesight and no Parkinson's whatsoever.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 122

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:01:20 PM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nihilimus

Actually, I think the defensive nature of Matrix staffers is where the point is lost. It does not serve your company well to act so defensively when a portion of your audience offers suggestions.

While I agree great graphics are critical to pulling in an audience, so is usuability and much of what is being said here crashes the core of this very complex game's workflow.

Points made about easy access to maps, addition quick keys, modular windows available to the user to popup, drop, hide while seeking the data for important decisions. All of this is to streamline workflow.

Yes... Some of our less visually-oriented friends don't need that and may be happy with either writing details on a pad or trying to remember across the vast expanses of the Pacific. I -- like military leaders past -- prefer a visual representation backed by quick access to data.

Like I allready sayed earlier in this thread. All of the comments are appreciated and we definetly do not scrap them. We allways have and will appreciate comments and discussions and we often, in fact very often, have listened to our fans and customers and incoporated suggestions they made.

quote:

While I agree great graphics are critical to pulling in an audience, so is usuability

Nobody of the staff will disagree with you on that.

< Message edited by Marc Schwanebeck -- 7/27/2004 3:04:13 AM >

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to nihilimus)

Post #: 123

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:10:07 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

You just apply a new coat of paint (graphics and sound) and you spend your time (aka money) on the stuff that REALLY matters, the design, the play, and the AI.

The manpower and time does not interfere here. And if you think that the graphic department staff does not REALLY matter in game design, then you obviously underestimate the potential graphics have on sales and on luring new blood into the market. Especially in wargaming.

If you do 3D shooter you MUST have killer graphics to keep the company alive and able to develop a new title. When you do wargames you add spicer graphics to get people from other genres attracted and interested.

But honestly, I�m very tired of this "graphics take away from gameplay development" discussions, since nobody ever acknowleges that these two departments simply don�t interfere ....

They take way when you reinvent the underlieing interface every time. FPS developers used to write their own 3D engines from scratch almost every time. I don't think many do that anymore. They even now reuse a lot of standard level design elements.

There is always a need for snazzy artwork, no matter what. Graphics are the curb appeal of any game, even a wargame. Even in business we need great splash screens and intro videos, backgrounds and such. But that snazzy eye-candy needs to sit on top standard stuff that can be reused or derived from, over and over and over again and again. "Spicer" graphics are great, so long as the lay on top of industry (and I mean overall software industry) standard UI elements.

The real problem is when the graphics BECOME the game as it is today in so many FPS and RTS games and seems to be creeping into the turn based Wargame genre as well. It is the tail wagging the dog syndrome and I see articles in the game media bemoaning that fact all the time. That's the paradigm I keep referring to. The "its just the way it is because it's always been that way".... type of thing. Problem is, most of these comments come from people who never done anything BUT game development. It's the exact same thing I alluded to in my Tandem comment in another post and Mogami made in his post concerning the map.

And before you jump on that one in my perspective, you'd miss. We incorporate quite a lot of ideas from the entertainment software industry in our own work. It took a long time, but we use a LOT of game-style graphics in our work now. Time was, we didn't, and that was our mistake! I think you folks make the same fundemental error of ignoring the latest developments from the business world by falling back on the old "...you just don't understand..." mantra.

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 124

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:10:49 PM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck
Like I allready sayed earlier in this thread. All of the comments are appreciated and we definetly do not scrap them. We allways have and will appreciate comments and discussions and we often, in fact very often, have listened to our fans and customers and incoporated suggestions they made.

I'm sure this is true. However what would be really really good for both company and customers is if you were to produce a list of ideas that you have taken on board. This would just serve to quantify and clarify things; it would not imply any commitment to implement anything.

A simple text or HTML file would do ...

Oh and the same thing for bugs would be even better

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 125

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:12:35 PM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

They take way when you reinvent the underlieing interface every time.

Do we?

quote:

seems to be creeping into the turn based Wargame genre as well.

Care to give any examples ?

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 126

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:13:36 PM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck
Like I allready sayed earlier in this thread. All of the comments are appreciated and we definetly do not scrap them. We allways have and will appreciate comments and discussions and we often, in fact very often, have listened to our fans and customers and incoporated suggestions they made.

I'm sure this is true. However what would be really really good for both company and customers is if you were to produce a list of ideas that you have taken on board. This would just serve to quantify and clarify things; it would not imply any commitment to implement anything.

A simple text or HTML file would do ...

Oh and the same thing for bugs would be even better

We do this internally, we don�t have the staff to make this public.

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 127

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:22:00 PM

Spooky

Posts: 816
Joined: 4/1/2002
From: Froggy Land
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Aircraft upgrade paths are not hard coded. They are set by the scenario designer in the editor. It is easy to change the paths. What cannot be done is change paths in a game.
Also you cannot go backwards (return to a type after you've upgraded)

This most likely has to do with the AI's handling of groups and production.

I don't see why in a two human game there is any need for a path at all. (Other then remaining within a class of aircraft)

Can we put this on the wish list? (Is it hard to program "ignore all upgrade paths"? But as a side effect the human allied player would need to gain control of his aircraft production (currently it reflects the upgrade paths) So it looks more major then in sounds.

My prefered method would be start with the existing airgroups and from then on have the players generate them as they want. Check aircraft in pool, pilots in pool, go to airgroup creation menu and create an airgroup. It enters training and emerges at the proper time at a specific Home Airfield. Minor nations get their airgroups in the current fashion.

I would love this feature for "airgroup creation" to be implemented in WITP ... and the "hard-coded in the scenario" plane upgrade path disabled.

BTW, I do not believe that it implies a player-controlled allied plane production since the allied plane production was mainly dedicated to the War in Europe ...

< Message edited by Spooky -- 7/26/2004 9:22:34 PM >

_____________________________

Visit Spooky's UV & WITP Fansite !

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 128

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:23:05 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, You can get a quick idea just by booting up UV and then WITP. However I don't recall a major issue with interface. The current system was what was always being considered when changes were made. Even all the posters that wanted WITP to go in other directions skipped over the interface. (Their projected changes would utilize the current interface as well)

However you can also boot up High Way to the Reich. Interface is nothing like UV/WITP so it is not a Matrix thing. When you team up with a writer you don't start by telling him to change his methods. I clearly see the 2 sides here and understand them both.

If you were to begin an entirley new project using brand new people I would expect "state of the art" However when a large portion of your buyers would buy the product sight unseen because of the designers past products then...........I don't know if the other interface is better. I like that phrase "more intutive" because WITP is more intutive for persons used to GG/DOS games while windows is confusing and the situation is reversed for person used to windows when they see the present interface. I was able to 100 percent operate the game from the moment I installed the first version. I still have trouble getting newer versions of Windows to do what I want them to. (I hate XP)

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 129

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:27:39 PM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nihilimus
Actually, I think the defensive nature of Matrix staffers is where the point is lost. It does not serve your company well to act so defensively when a portion of your audience offers suggestions.

Unfortunately this happens in a lot of game fora and usually it's nothing to do with the staff but over-zealous fans. It's also made worse by the tone and aggressiveness of criticism. It then degenerates to a personal level where even good points made by posters fall on deaf ears.

(in reply to nihilimus)

Post #: 130

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:35:00 PM

Tige

Posts: 7
Joined: 7/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami
I guess when I helped make the map. OOB, and looked at the map for 2 years it never occured to me that other players would not instantly understand the weres and whats as they watch a turn resolve. By habit I check every unit that egages in combat and can tell what effect the previous turn had. I know where Coast Watchers are located and when the turn is running I know what they are seeing. (As the sighting occurs I decide what my reaction during my orders phase will be)

It is difficult to find a way to convince you that some day all these added features would be more clutter then use. WITP is not a casual game. There is a vast amount of input for players to absorb and utilize. However for players watching a turn resolve who are watching "Their Plan" evolve much is understood automaticlly. When one of my TF is sighted 20 hexes from nearest land by an enemy carrier type aircraft I do not need a giant red x placed on the map so I can remember it. If I first take the time to study the situation I understand where certain enemy forces are going to or coming from when I sight them. This is not an attempt to justify the ommision of your desired player aids. Only my explanation for why I never brought them up in testing. They never occured to me.

I understand where you are coming from as the more I play the more familiar I am with certain locations and chokepoints. I too will plan ops durning the resolution phase and having your CV(s) spotted within striking distance of Rabaul is something I don't need to be continually reminded of :).

It is not so much a player aid I'm requesting with certain maps and charts. It is just a more efficient way of doing things, again, thats why war rooms have maps, not bookcases :). If you take each turn individually and react as the resolution unfolds you may or may not be over-reacting. This would become more evident in a PBEM game. Visualizing your coastwatcher and/or recon results on a chart you can link events together over weeks or months. Is that convoy you spotted a couple of times headed South down an island chain just bringing supplies to keep a small outpost operational or are they linking up with the surface combat ships reportedly headed their direction from the West? This may or may not seem like a unrelated event but after a couple of days it is much easier to interpet movement on a chart than a clipboard.

Seeing your own plan unfold is easy, it is trying to see your enemy's plan unfold is where the ability to visualize the big picture becomes important. This is where the stacks of paper bogs you down, scrolling through the sigint and coastwatcher reports then locating them on the map etc etc. All of this is can be much, much more efficiently done via one map with the ability to layer certain bits of information on it.

Seeing a chart with all sighting reports can give time to track, evaluate the accuracy and meaning of what you are confronted with.

-Tige

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 131

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:38:47 PM

Black Cat

Posts: 615
Joined: 7/4/2002
Status: offline

I wonder if some of the non Matrix programming types who have contributed so much, for so long, to this thread could design a utility or 2 so we can pull the much desired info out of the Game for review by Alt-Tab out.

John McDonnel did a nifty little one that`s on Spooky`s site that archives all the Signet reports allowing you to review and even print them out from the desktop.

One that lists all your air units current strength and losses by day would be one that could be helpful.

< Message edited by Black Cat -- 7/26/2004 8:40:11 PM >

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 132

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:39:50 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, Don't you tink part of it is simply the product is finished and now all the "I could have done it betters" appear? UV was in development for 2 years. There was an open forum. WITP required another 2 years with an open forum. (And WITP reflects a vast amount of inpput from these forums) And now that it is out people express saddness that the finished product is exactly what it has always claimed it would be. We are told we don't listen or we close our ears. Everyone knew who the designer was. Many of us expected the interface to be exactly what it is. Many of us have no problem with "might have been"
If a person knows how to do it better but also knows exactly what another programmer always does "wheres the beef"?

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 133

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:41:39 PM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck
Like I allready sayed earlier in this thread. All of the comments are appreciated and we definetly do not scrap them. We allways have and will appreciate comments and discussions and we often, in fact very often, have listened to our fans and customers and incoporated suggestions they made.

I'm sure this is true. However what would be really really good for both company and customers is if you were to produce a list of ideas that you have taken on board. This would just serve to quantify and clarify things; it would not imply any commitment to implement anything.

A simple text or HTML file would do ...

Oh and the same thing for bugs would be even better

We do this internally, we don�t have the staff to make this public.

OK, well I'm a little sceptical that's the real reason but whatever. I do think it would do immense good in the community though ... and now I'm going to shut up

Except to say that I am absolutely certain I could not do better ... and thanks for an awesome creation.

< Message edited by Captain Cruft -- 7/26/2004 8:44:52 PM >

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 134

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 10:42:23 PM

Tanaka

Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

No, like most everyone else here, I have a life outside of WitP, that prevents me committing 200+ pages of a game manual to memory. I imagine, a month into this game, what I don't know VASTLY outweighs what I do know about this game. And I expect that may be the case for long time to come, as well. I appreciate now knowing how to filter my map display, but regardless, take your smartassed RTFM comments and stick them in a warm dark place....

Can you please explain me how an actuall answer to a question by you that obviously also answers it can be "smartassed" ?

Easy. I don't expect to EVER be told, directly, by support staff, to RTFM. I would FIRE any of my support technicians here if I EVER got even a remote INKLING they were talking to a customer like that. There is a way you inform poeple about where in the manual a certain item is without slapping them in the face with a ignorant RTFM comment. It's not appreciated and I, for one, will not tolerate being talked to like the four year child.

I find it hard to believe you cannot tell that that is poor customer service and where someone can be highly offended by RTFM like comments. I KNOW how stupid I am concerning this game, I don't need thin-skinned beta-tester to slap me in the face with it.

He didn�t directly and only sayed RTFM. He even gave you an answer to your "complaint".

Frag is not customer service, he�s a member of thuis community, helping and answering peoples questions beyond duty. For years!

Just have to say it amazes me how Mr. Frag goes out of his way to help us crazy WITP fans so unselfishly for so long. I would have gone bzonkers by now. If he gets a little flustered once and a while I dont blame him at all and all I want to say is thank you and keep up the great work!!!! He problably should have said RTFM to me many times and im sure lots of others would say the same!!!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 7/26/2004 5:58:29 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 135

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:04:04 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

They take way when you reinvent the underlieing interface every time.

Do we?

quote:

seems to be creeping into the turn based Wargame genre as well.

Care to give any examples ?

I apologize for not being able to articulate my points very well. You stated before the graphics and UI widget development never interferes? I simply don't get that. May be a semantics problem here. I'm not talking about the combat animations, the opening splash screen and movie here. I'm taking about the game dialogs and their component GUI widgets. Those UI widgets that collect and present information to the user.

If I use a standard Windows GUI dialog as developed using the Visual Studio diaglog editor, in order to customize it, and make it look like a "game" UI element and not something out of Microsoft Word, I would expect the graphics department to have a huge array of, themes, images, brushes and the sort to create the "Motif" my game wants to present, available for me to use in generating ListBoxes, ComboBoxes, Pushbuttoms all with the ownerdrawn flag set and then paint them accordingly. All VERY easy to do using MFC, wxWidgets, Fox, etc.... I can pretty much recreate the WitP diaglog motif right now using standard WIN32 stuff.

Graphics get in the way, by convincing the staff that WIN32 Widgets won't cut it, they want to roll their own, because either they feel they are better able to create the "feel" or simply because, as you stated, doing bitmap buttons, and textured dialog background is "boring" and you don't want a "boring" job. Either way, if that happens, the tail has just wagged the dog!

And my example of all the "candy" invading wargames is all the DirectX stuff in WitP. I can play MPEG video, MP3 files, display a UI, etc.. all without having to use DirectX because while all that stuff is "nice" it has very little to do with the appeal of the game. This is NOT EverQuest II, it is, as one poster stated, a database editting excersise!

And why, again, does a database editting application have to eat up 200MB RAM and peg my CPU at 100%, 100% of the time? I can't seem to figure that one out at all?

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/26/2004 9:07:13 PM >

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 136

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:12:30 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, You can get a quick idea just by booting up UV and then WITP. However I don't recall a major issue with interface. The current system was what was always being considered when changes were made. Even all the posters that wanted WITP to go in other directions skipped over the interface. (Their projected changes would utilize the current interface as well)

However you can also boot up High Way to the Reich. Interface is nothing like UV/WITP so it is not a Matrix thing. When you team up with a writer you don't start by telling him to change his methods. I clearly see the 2 sides here and understand them both.

If you were to begin an entirley new project using brand new people I would expect "state of the art" However when a large portion of your buyers would buy the product sight unseen because of the designers past products then...........I don't know if the other interface is better. I like that phrase "more intutive" because WITP is more intutive for persons used to GG/DOS games while windows is confusing and the situation is reversed for person used to windows when they see the present interface. I was able to 100 percent operate the game from the moment I installed the first version. I still have trouble getting newer versions of Windows to do what I want them to. (I hate XP)

Always well put and eloquently spoken. Yes, it is truely a matter of "perspective". The two sides can meet, however. I can easily make Windows code look like anything BUT a Windows App just as you guys can make nonWindows UI's look a lot like Windows. One involves using the OWNERDRAWN flag and its associated WIN32 Event stream, an industry standard, and one involves using something unique. Not a problem, I suppose, if you intend on resuing the UI in dozens of new titles over the years, even if you'd have to train a new programmer in how to code it with every new hire.....

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 137

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:17:35 PM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Don't you tink part of it is simply the product is finished and now all the "I could have done it betters" appear? UV was in development for 2 years. There was an open forum. WITP required another 2 years with an open forum. (And WITP reflects a vast amount of inpput from these forums) And now that it is out people express saddness that the finished product is exactly what it has always claimed it would be. We are told we don't listen or we close our ears. Everyone knew who the designer was. Many of us expected the interface to be exactly what it is. Many of us have no problem with "might have been"
If a person knows how to do it better but also knows exactly what another programmer always does "wheres the beef"?

Yes, I don't think the "I can do better" attitude helps at all, though a UI is not something which is typically known until one uses it. It's impossible to determine how a game plays from screenshots and descriptions. Further, I'm not really sure if customers should be expected to follow a 2 year design in order to have the "right" to post comments. If the risk of offense is so great, then really posting rights should be reserved only for those qualified to have shown enough interest prior to release ;)

However, the thread began with some very general comments about what some obviously see as a weakness in the game design and promptly fell apart from there. Funnily enough, the same thing happened in the AI thread, and in threads all over the internet. A combination of fans being less over-sensitive to their sacred cow being criticised, and other fans's aggresive second guessing ensures that most of the 5 pages here are pretty worthless.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 138

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:22:50 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Don't you tink part of it is simply the product is finished and now all the "I could have done it betters" appear? UV was in development for 2 years. There was an open forum. WITP required another 2 years with an open forum. (And WITP reflects a vast amount of inpput from these forums) And now that it is out people express saddness that the finished product is exactly what it has always claimed it would be. We are told we don't listen or we close our ears. Everyone knew who the designer was. Many of us expected the interface to be exactly what it is. Many of us have no problem with "might have been"
If a person knows how to do it better but also knows exactly what another programmer always does "wheres the beef"?

I have to agree with this to a point. We love to pick things apart. It's part of being anally-retentative grogs... Some get taken aback, though, by the rather significant amount of defensiveness by Matrix staffers when some question their methods. Most of what I see in threads like this one are not so much as criticisms of this game, but in the general nature of this particular aspect (in this case the UI), and are mostly intended for digestion and incorporation into the next major project to come along. I certainly expect no radical alteration to the way WitP plays or looks. It's a done deal, and it does what it does the way it does it. It's success will be ultimately decided by how much money its investors make off of it.

The next one doesn't have to adhere to this one's approach at all, though.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 139

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:56:00 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nihilimus
Actually, I think the defensive nature of Matrix staffers is where the point is lost. It does not serve your company well to act so defensively when a portion of your audience offers suggestions.

While I agree great graphics are critical to pulling in an audience, so is usuability and much of what is being said here crashes the core of this very complex game's workflow.

Points made about easy access to maps, addition quick keys, modular windows available to the user to popup, drop, hide while seeking the data for important decisions. All of this is to streamline workflow.

Yes... Some of our less visually-oriented friends don't need that and may be happy with either writing details on a pad or trying to remember across the vast expanses of the Pacific. I -- like military leaders past -- prefer a visual representation backed by quick access to data.

Since I was one of the first to reply I thought I should throw in a few more pennies. I've been reading this thread very closely, not looking for problems but absorbing all of your suggestions. We have a very small staff (buy more games!

) and until we expand, there's simply not enough time to post back on everything. However, there are at least three people going through these suggestions. What we can do in future revisions is not up to me, but we are definitely watching, listening and as always we will try our best to continue improving the title after release.

Honestly, I was interested in the suggestions from the first post and remain so, I just couldn't agree with the idea that not much had changed since the original PacWar.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to nihilimus)

Post #: 140

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/26/2004 11:57:11 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

Great point! Couldn't have said it better if I tried for months. I see it around my own shop, myself and I see this very thing in the Matrix staff, in general. You get so used to doing something a certain way and so used to looking at the same thing for so long, you can't really see or even comprehend anything else! .... Matrix, PLEASE, don't get hide-bound. It will be the death of our genre....

You miss the point that non of our products are the same. WITP and UV share a base engine, true. But other projects have their own new and intuitive engines. We have a lot of different approches. We�re definelty NOT hide-bound.

That very well, may be. This perspective more likely comes from the fact that I tend to only exclusively follow GG inspired titles, because over the past 20+ years his games seem to generally be the only type of game that appeals to me. I've tired others but never really liked any of them so I always come back.

However, after following GG stuff for that time I also see, plainly, just how hide-bound HIS efforts seem to be. Same massive hard-coding, same fixed array based data manipulation design, same problems with rigidity of design over and over again. It would be wonderful to see a GG designed game, complete with all his 6th sense at formula development and ability to delivery incredibly balanced game play, only designed and coded in a state-of-the-art methodology. Bascially, let Gary design but keep him away from the development environment, source code, and database design!!!!

So my real angst probably arises more from a competing, seemingly diametrically opposed set of interests, love of GG design and game style, hate of GG programming/data management style, and probably has little to do with Matrix at all....

So you think developing background textures and bitmaps for bitmap-buttons for WIN32 GUI's and such is "boring"? I guess I would, too..... But then server-side database design/programming is a boring as it gets, but it's what I have made a big chunk of my income doing for many years now....

GG coupled with a couple of object oriented designers and coders, an experienced GUI developer, and an SQL database guru thrown in......now THAT would be something to behold.....in my dreams....

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 141

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:02:22 AM

MadDawg

Posts: 374
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

ORIGINAL: nihilimus
Actually, I think the defensive nature of Matrix staffers is where the point is lost. It does not serve your company well to act so defensively when a portion of your audience offers suggestions.

While I agree great graphics are critical to pulling in an audience, so is usuability and much of what is being said here crashes the core of this very complex game's workflow.

Points made about easy access to maps, addition quick keys, modular windows available to the user to popup, drop, hide while seeking the data for important decisions. All of this is to streamline workflow.

Yes... Some of our less visually-oriented friends don't need that and may be happy with either writing details on a pad or trying to remember across the vast expanses of the Pacific. I -- like military leaders past -- prefer a visual representation backed by quick access to data.

Since I was one of the first to reply I thought I should throw in a few more pennies. I've been reading this thread very closely, not looking for problems but absorbing all of your suggestions. We have a very small staff (buy more games! ) and until we expand, there's simply not enough time to post back on everything. However, there are at least three people going through these suggestions. What we can do in future revisions is not up to me, but we are definitely watching, listening and as always we will try our best to continue improving the title after release.

Honestly, I was interested in the suggestions from the first post and remain so, I just couldn't agree with the idea that not much had changed since the original PacWar.

Regards,

- Erik

Thanks for the response Erik!

I had been worried that this thread had turned into an 'us vs them' situation and the actual point of the thread was going to be lost in the war of words. Hopefully there are some changes that can be made just to make the interface and information flow to the user more intuitive as I think that this size of this game really requires it.

Dawg

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 142

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:15:28 AM

Damien Thorn

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline

I really like the idea someone had to be able to drag a task force to a destination hex. Since we can alrerady get information about the task force by doing a mouse over we can usually tell where we'd like it to go without needing to open the TF page. Dragging would save lots of time and lots of clicking.

(in reply to MadDawg)

Post #: 143

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:19:26 AM

Primal Fury

Posts: 35
Joined: 7/10/2004
Status: offline

Thanks for looking at the suggestions! These are meant to be constructive in nature:

Probably the biggest thing would be the ability to capture the text out of any window (and allow it to be input to excel or some other external program). This could either be done by supporting CTRL-A, CTRL-C or by producing a text file in the SAVE directory which contains the text of the current window, white space separated.

Improving the create transport TF sequence would also be much appreciated. Suggestion: From the the ground unit menu, allow "create TF to hold this gound unit" function that shows you the current/required capacities of the TF as you form it.

Drag-and-drop TF to set new destination would speed up play by a huge amount and allow you to look at the map while making moves.

Cheers guys!

_____________________________

(in reply to MadDawg)

Post #: 144

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:21:01 AM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

ORIGINAL: nihilimus
Actually, I think the defensive nature of Matrix staffers is where the point is lost. It does not serve your company well to act so defensively when a portion of your audience offers suggestions.

While I agree great graphics are critical to pulling in an audience, so is usuability and much of what is being said here crashes the core of this very complex game's workflow.

Points made about easy access to maps, addition quick keys, modular windows available to the user to popup, drop, hide while seeking the data for important decisions. All of this is to streamline workflow.

Yes... Some of our less visually-oriented friends don't need that and may be happy with either writing details on a pad or trying to remember across the vast expanses of the Pacific. I -- like military leaders past -- prefer a visual representation backed by quick access to data.

Since I was one of the first to reply I thought I should throw in a few more pennies. I've been reading this thread very closely, not looking for problems but absorbing all of your suggestions. We have a very small staff (buy more games! ) and until we expand, there's simply not enough time to post back on everything. However, there are at least three people going through these suggestions. What we can do in future revisions is not up to me, but we are definitely watching, listening and as always we will try our best to continue improving the title after release.

Honestly, I was interested in the suggestions from the first post and remain so, I just couldn't agree with the idea that not much had changed since the original PacWar.

Regards,

- Erik

ZOOMIE'S basic design suggestions in a nutshell. And these are just "suggestions" born out of near total ignorance of this side of the business. Not so much Matrix, but anyone desiring to be a Matrix Partner. I know you are basically the marketing, distribution arm of a consortium of many small partners that offers some development assistance in the form of programming services and graphic arts support. However any current or prospective Matrix partner might keep these in mind

1) Incorporate Object Oriented design in EVERYTHING you do.

2) Start from the bottom up, and develop robust, multi-tiered class libraries to handle the every day, ordinary, rudimentary chores. This includes a large library of reusable, easily derived from, GUI Widgets, and associated graphical overlays. (Maybe Matrix could do this part as part of their "Programming Assistant Services" function).

3) Investigate using SQL databases in a client-server style paradigm for more robust, flexible management of data and place ALL the game's rules in that database in form of database constraints. These are mostly turn base wargame titles, NOT Halflife IV FPS's and can make use of large disk IO without a loss of performance.

4) Utilize the above database system in the AI.

5) Base all UI's on standard Windows UI Widgets and consider using off-the-shelf third party object oriented toolkits like MFC, wxWidgets or Fox and go from there. Fox and wxWidgets are cross-platform, too, meaning MAC and even Linux opens up.

6) Once mature, consider selling licenses to an honest to God WarGame Developers API for a modest fee. Then new ideas come to market without the developers having to reinvent all these wheels all the time. Maybe as limited as incorporating some of GG's (or other's) best generic forumula in a series of API calls (and of course GG/others gets a royalty for each sale....). That way programmers get the benifit of his genius without him giving away all his secrets!

7) Possible consideration of a subscription based (very modest rate to basically cover server hosting costs + reasonable margin) client server type game along the lines of the old Wolfpack Empire game. Not for everyone, but the PBEM crowd might be enthused by this. Opens the door to massive-multi player titles in the turn based genre and steady, even if small revenue stream.

8) Publish this sort of stuff in a "Developmental Guide for prospective Matrix Partners".

That's just off the top of my head.....

PS: Don't throw out Java out of hand. A WitP is could definitely be done via Java. With Java, all the really HARD stuff, someone has already done!

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/26/2004 10:32:20 PM >

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 145

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:26:31 AM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

Graphics get in the way, by convincing the staff that WIN32 Widgets won't cut it, they want to roll their own, because either they feel they are better able to create the "feel" or simply because, as you stated, doing bitmap buttons, and textured dialog background is "boring" and you don't want a "boring" job. Either way, if that happens, the tail has just wagged the dog!

ROFLMAO. I worked on both UV and WITP and never ever had the graphics department any word on what can be done and what not. We allways had to work and work around with what was given because that was the way the engine was set up. WITP would "look" totally different if it would have been for me and the graphic guys. These two projects are definetly a prime example of the dog wagging the tail.

As for Win32 Widgets, yes if the programmer is not able to built it so that you can generate a feel (for some games this is essential, for others not so much; you also might want to note that I never sayed that WITP or UV type of games would do bad with a Windows like GUI) then I will object and do it the "standard" way. This however does not keep the game developer and coders from developing an accesible and intuitive GUI. Graphic artists paint on what ever "canvas" is given for the job, they don�t tailor the canvas

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to MadDawg)

Post #: 146

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:38:42 AM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

Graphics get in the way, by convincing the staff that WIN32 Widgets won't cut it, they want to roll their own, because either they feel they are better able to create the "feel" or simply because, as you stated, doing bitmap buttons, and textured dialog background is "boring" and you don't want a "boring" job. Either way, if that happens, the tail has just wagged the dog!

ROFLMAO. I worked on both UV and WITP and never ever had the graphics department any word on what can be done and what not. We allways had to work and work around with what was given because that was the way the engine was set up. WITP would "look" totally different if it would have been for me and the graphic guys. These two projects are definetly a prime example of the dog wagging the tail.

As for Win32 Widgets, yes if the programmer is not able to built it so that you can generate a feel (for some games this is essential, for others not so much; you also might want to note that I never sayed that WITP or UV type of games would do bad with a Windows like GUI) then I will object and do it the "standard" way. This however does not keep the game developer and coders from developing an accesible and intuitive GUI. Graphic artists paint on what ever "canvas" is given for the job, they don�t tailor the canvas

Well then to be fair to you, they SHOULD be consulting the graphics guys at least a little. But in the end, the graphics is the icing on the cake, never the cake.

And I have to admit, I'm kind of suprised by your "standard" comment. To me, using WIN32 widgets is THE standard, everything else is a one-off, custom, roll your own and all the development, maintenance, management headaches that entails. Which also means when your existing programmer(s) versed in your one-off UI gets hit by a bus on the way into work tommorrow, how much training is his replacement going to have to have to be of use? WIN32 GUI programmers are everywhere, custom UI guys are....well....unique....

BTW, thanks MUCHly for the insight into how things work inside Matrix in this area. It is VERY enlighteneing for me to understand this. Thanks for your candor.

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/26/2004 10:40:33 PM >

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 147

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:43:05 AM

Marc von Martial

Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

quote:

Graphics get in the way, by convincing the staff that WIN32 Widgets won't cut it, they want to roll their own, because either they feel they are better able to create the "feel" or simply because, as you stated, doing bitmap buttons, and textured dialog background is "boring" and you don't want a "boring" job. Either way, if that happens, the tail has just wagged the dog!

ROFLMAO. I worked on both UV and WITP and never ever had the graphics department any word on what can be done and what not. We allways had to work and work around with what was given because that was the way the engine was set up. WITP would "look" totally different if it would have been for me and the graphic guys. These two projects are definetly a prime example of the dog wagging the tail.

As for Win32 Widgets, yes if the programmer is not able to built it so that you can generate a feel (for some games this is essential, for others not so much; you also might want to note that I never sayed that WITP or UV type of games would do bad with a Windows like GUI) then I will object and do it the "standard" way. This however does not keep the game developer and coders from developing an accesible and intuitive GUI. Graphic artists paint on what ever "canvas" is given for the job, they don�t tailor the canvas

Well then to be fair to you, they SHOULD be consulting the graphics guys at least a little. But in the end, the graphics is the icing on the cake, never the cake.

And I have to admit, I'm kind of suprised by your "standard" comment. To me, using WIN32 widgets is THE standard, everything else is a one-off, custom, roll your own and all the development, maintenance, management headaches that entails. Which also means when your existing programmer(s) versed in your one-off UI gets hit by a bus on the way into work tommorrow, how much training is his replacement going to have to have to be of use? WIN32 GUI programmers are everywhere, custom UI guys are....well....unique....

BTW, thanks MUCHly for the insight into how things work inside Matrix in this area. It is VERY enlighteneing for me to understand this. Thanks for your candor.

I think you overestimate the ammount you have to "learn". From my conversations with the coders it never really sounded like "rocket science" to code buttons etc.

For some people Win32 is "the" standard, for other people their code / libraries is "the" standard

< Message edited by Marc Schwanebeck -- 7/27/2004 5:44:16 AM >

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 148

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:45:25 AM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, It was the threads title. I'm fretting about some poor soul in anguish over the games interface. I can't think something I enjoy so much is causing another person to experiance saddness. without trying to make it better.

I recall years ago an album where Rick Wakemen claimed in the credits to have "improved" Franz Listz (not arranged but improved) To this day I often listen to the music of Franz Listz but I had not listened to Mr Wakeman since that day. In Beriut before the the collapse of the government there was an opera house. One season they presented a Wagner Opera. But they had hired some Italian modern artsy fartsy who made major "improvements" The Opera House was burnt down (IN Beruit

they still prefered it the old way) I'm sure in both cases there were supporters. However if the market wants a certain thing thats what it wants. Other markets want other things and they have there set of advocates. It seems on the surface (to me a least) GG is being asked to reinvent himself so that he can produce the same product. Now if a new user comes along who has never heard of GG and has never played this style but was brought up on the newer systems he will think it old fashioned and cumbersome.
I don't think 2by3 ever pretended that this particular product was going to be "new" in the sense that is was different from past products only that the subject was to be treated much more in depth.

It sounds like a reasonable request to make it easier and less time consuming to develop future products but then I wonder just what goes into his creative process. Prehaps (and I have no real idea whether this is a valid line or not) the end products are a result of his existing methods and they would lose something in the translation. Can any code write any routine and get the exact same results? Does any portion of a games flavour result from how it is composed? I mean is it so simple? Will we see in the future a generation of game designers able to do it better? (Since it seems so much easier now)

OK I'll let it drop. I don't really like inferring in other peoples opinions and like I said it was the threads title that provoked my need to respond. I can't help worring that something more was expected. (no matter what expanded abilities exist no one ever claimed as far as I know to be writing in any new way and I for one expectd from the start and was happy to get exactly what I got)

< Message edited by Mogami -- 7/26/2004 5:49:12 PM >

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 149

RE: saddened by poor interface - 7/27/2004 12:52:40 AM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

I think you overestimate the ammount you have to "learn". From my conversations with the coders it never really sounded like "rocket science" to code buttons etc.

For some people Win32 is "the" standard, for other people their code / libraries is "the" standard

The problem, once again, comes from a strategic code management perspective in terms of the potential for reusablity across multiple titles, potentially even by more than one Matrix partner. Basic WIN32 widgets are nearly infinitely reusable while retaining a great deal of graphic flexibility vs custom designed UI widgets for use by a particular title. And you are STILL going to have a much bigger productivity impact when you lose a custom UI programmer to other interests vs a WIN32 UI developer.

And the fact one even has to "code" a button, per se, speaks volumes to me. The OS already does that for standard WIN32 UI buttons, all one has to do is handle the WM_COMMAND event that results from pressing it..... In a roll your own, the programmer had to develop the entire event stream themselves (and heaven forbid, the event message pump, mouse tracking, etc... as well), or recode a new button every time he needs a button (as in the old DOS semi-gui's of days gone by). Ugh....lots of "brute force" there == lots of manhours spent doing something Bill Gates and Co already do very well == lots of money.

Think you get my point here???

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/26/2004 11:01:28 PM >

(in reply to Marc von Martial)

Post #: 150

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: saddened by poor interface