Interface feedback (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

carnifex -> Interface feedback (12/5/2007 9:34:21 PM)

I should be finding interface defects and issues in software I actually get paid to test, but out of the goodness of my heart here is a list for you:

1) If I select a non-owned province and click the Add Forces to Garrison button I see garbage characters in the chat area.

2) How come there is no Close button for the View Available Counters window?

3) End Current Phase dialog is not logical. When you ask a system to take an action and it presents a warning window, disregarding or proceeding should be the result of a YES or a positive button. Like "You still have armies to place." - "Proceed anyway?" YES/NO The instinctive action of any warned user is to click NO when in doubt. (The Remove Unit dialog has the correct method for example).

4) The buttons in the upper left that launch a non-full screen window should be modal (like Victory Status). That is, click to launch window and click to close it. Currently only Show Nation Stats work this way. Why force a user to travel his mouse to some OK button across the page when they can just click the same button again?

5) The Selected Area info window should update when actions are taken. Example: Select a province and build a depot. A depot appears in the Selected Area info. Now select that depot and remove it. Result: the Selected Area info window continues to display depot until that area is manually re-selected.

6) The Selected Unit info should also update. Currently it shows the units from the last province selected that had units. If you select an empty province it will still show units from the last time.

7) Of the buttons in the lower left, all present error messages as text in the chat area, EXCEPT the add/remove depot which pops-up a giant warning window. All error messages should be standardized to appear in the same place.

8) The tooltip over the active nation phase says "Left Click - Zoom to Capital". It should say "Right Click..."

9) All windows that have a simple OK close button should be closed either by ESCAPE or RETURN.

10) Doubleclicking on a nation in the Nation Status Display should close the window and take you to that nation. (not really a bug just something I like to see in windows with lists).



Erik Rutins -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 9:38:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex
2) How come there is no Close button for the View Available Counters window?


Just making sure you know that you can right click to close it.

Regards,

- Erik



Murat -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 9:41:30 PM)

I cannot seem to select a country to request an alliance. ALSO< how to I declare a pre-existing state of war? Can't find that either.



sabre100 -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 9:50:51 PM)

Just bought it,  like it a  lot !!   I like the interface no issues here, however is there anyway to run it in a "Windowed Mode"  I know the resolution is fixed at 1024x768.  If you can't do windowed mode how about adding that in a patch ?



Monadman -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 9:58:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

I cannot seem to select a country to request an alliance. ALSO< how to I declare a pre-existing state of war? Can't find that either.


To create an alliance, one or both must chose to accept the potential major power(s) in the DIPLOMATIC REACTIONS SCREEN while one, or both, also click the appropriate “Attempt Alliance” phase button during their diplomacy turn. Results are displayed at the start of the reinforcement phase.

Currently, you can only declare a pre-existing war in a PBEM game and only when you use the GAP.

Richard



tgb -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 10:13:25 PM)

The manual says that double-clicking a nations name in the top info panel takes you to the capitol. FYI, it's actually right-clicking that does it.



Monadman -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 10:19:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

I should be finding interface defects and issues in software I actually get paid to test, but out of the goodness of my heart here is a list for you:

1) If I select a non-owned province and click the Add Forces to Garrison button I see garbage characters in the chat area.

2) How come there is no Close button for the View Available Counters window?

3) End Current Phase dialog is not logical. When you ask a system to take an action and it presents a warning window, disregarding or proceeding should be the result of a YES or a positive button. Like "You still have armies to place." - "Proceed anyway?" YES/NO The instinctive action of any warned user is to click NO when in doubt. (The Remove Unit dialog has the correct method for example).

4) The buttons in the upper left that launch a non-full screen window should be modal (like Victory Status). That is, click to launch window and click to close it. Currently only Show Nation Stats work this way. Why force a user to travel his mouse to some OK button across the page when they can just click the same button again?

5) The Selected Area info window should update when actions are taken. Example: Select a province and build a depot. A depot appears in the Selected Area info. Now select that depot and remove it. Result: the Selected Area info window continues to display depot until that area is manually re-selected.

6) The Selected Unit info should also update. Currently it shows the units from the last province selected that had units. If you select an empty province it will still show units from the last time.

7) Of the buttons in the lower left, all present error messages as text in the chat area, EXCEPT the add/remove depot which pops-up a giant warning window. All error messages should be standardized to appear in the same place.

8) The tooltip over the active nation phase says "Left Click - Zoom to Capital". It should say "Right Click..."

9) All windows that have a simple OK close button should be closed either by ESCAPE or RETURN.

10) Doubleclicking on a nation in the Nation Status Display should close the window and take you to that nation. (not really a bug just something I like to see in windows with lists).



There was actually one item you listed that went un-reported (Left Click - Zoom to Capital). Anyway, simple as they may be to address, the Interface was a low priority due to the complexity of coding this game – rule of play got the nod. It doesn’t mean these items will not be evaluated when the opportunity presents itself (still prioritizing issues). Btw, as you can see, Marshall is big on right mouse clicking.

Thanks for taking the time to put that list together Carnifex.

Richard



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Interface feedback (12/5/2007 10:52:53 PM)

Carnifex:

I confirm what Richard said and I always appreciate other ideas! I appreciate the time!




carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/6/2007 4:44:37 AM)

Ok, here's more ideas:

Double-clicking a unit in the Selected Area should have the same effect as when you do it on the map.

Please, please reverse the text flow. I've been chatting online forever and I've played a bajillion games which have chat boxes where the chat flows upwards, so please don't make me read things upside down, especially when I expand the text area. I am constantly moving the text area slider to the wrong end looking for the 'latest' news.

Speaking of text, "resolving trade requests" is a little vague. I'd to know who wants to and who was denied, etc.

And that Diplomatic Reactions screen, that should have a select all function for nearly all these windows. Also, selecting minors to support or withdraw is counter-intuitative. You don't actually click the minor even though they're right there up on top with a checkbox, you click the countries list below and that turns on the checkbox. I bet lots of people are clicking on Holland and watching their check mark disappear har har.

When you're adding factors to a corps/fleet counter, there should be info on how many max factors that container can contain.



carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/6/2007 4:48:43 AM)

Oh also, speaking of interface, how do I see more than fifteen units in the selected area?

I got 25 units here but...

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/units.jpg[/image]



Monadman -> RE: Interface feedback (12/6/2007 5:28:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

Oh also, speaking of interface, how do I see more than fifteen units in the selected area?

I got 25 units here but...

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/units.jpg[/image]


There should be scroll bars but I do not see them in your jpg. There is a suspicious gap in the corps being displayed (between the Guard and the XII corps). You obviously did this as a test so could you give more details?

Richard




carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/6/2007 5:42:14 AM)

I see how I lost the scrollbars now.  I right-clicked the Selected Area to see the map view and when I clicked back they were gone and stayed gone until I re-launched the game.

During set up I selected all of France's land units and leaders and placed them in one province.  Then I selected the province, and right clicked the Selected Area unit display to get the map view.  Right-clicking again lost the scrollbars.



carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 7:05:48 PM)

Here's an example of pop-up windows which are inconsistent. These are displayed sequentially. In the Reinforcement phase, first you see this one:

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/yes_means_no.jpg[/image]

In this case YES means NO. If you click YES you DO NOT PROCEED.

The next window is shown right after that one. In this case, YES means PROCEED.

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/yes_means_yes.jpg[/image]

YES should always mean "go ahead". NO should always mean "cancel action".





Murat -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 7:26:29 PM)

The top window asks you if you want to RETURN AND PLACE. The second one asks if you want to PROCEED. As far as the english language is concerned they are correct and consistent. Again, this is only a trap for people who do not watch what they are doing.  Many programs, especially with EULAs, switch up the messages above the botton to force people to pay attention to what they are actually clicking on and agreeing to.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 7:31:02 PM)

I thought we had most of that cleared up but obviously not!
We'll look to get that cleared up. May not make it to the first patch but we'll get it fixed!

D##n programmers ... :-)




carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 9:25:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

The top window asks you if you want to RETURN AND PLACE. The second one asks if you want to PROCEED. As far as the english language is concerned they are correct and consistent. Again, this is only a trap for people who do not watch what they are doing. Many programs, especially with EULAs, switch up the messages above the botton to force people to pay attention to what they are actually clicking on and agreeing to.


Yeah, I really don't care if it's correct and consistent as far as the english language is concerned because my expertise isn't the english language, it's interface design and user workflow. And as far as interface design and user workflow is concerned, the pop-ups are NOT consistent.

I would understand if you wrote well this is a minor matter and the developer shouldn't devote any resources to this, but to just come out and be all like in favor of trapping people and punishing them for not paying attention, that's just unbelievable. The whole point of computer interfaces is to have the user NOT pay attention and still achieve desired results. Sigh.




Murat -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 9:46:24 PM)

No. The whole point for YOU may be that in an interface. Some interfaces, as I pointed out, are desired to achieve the results of the DESIGNER not the user. Few users want to read any sort of licensing agreement yet many dsigners make you click a button confirming you read it. In this case, the variation seems to make sure people do not rush through their moves and instead confirm that what they have done is what they actually intended to do. You could call it another layer or check on people not moving beyond their turn and making a mistake that may appear innocuous in the short term but may have major long term effects. So I was advancing the benefit of the current system instead of nitpicking on something that apparently works fine and that did not confuse you, since you caught it and explained it so well. If I seem a little short it is because we have far too many people complaining about wanting a popup instead of information in a window format, etc. Focus on the game killers, not the cosmetics. There's a wonderful section for mods where people have done awesome cosmetic changes.



carnifex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 11:25:31 PM)

Saying things like "focus on the game killers" demonstrates a very naive view of software development.

Please stop hijacking this thread. I'm trying to give feedback and you're jumping in talking about EULA's and oranges.

If you feel one of my reports is in error, just say so and detail where I went wrong. If you have philosophical differences with my approach or focus, please start a new thread titled "Things I'd like other people to focus on".



Murat -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 11:47:32 PM)

Your report is in error. This is not a flaw. I have detailed why it is a benefit. Quit telling people to be quiet just because they disagree with you. If you lack the mental capacity to understand what I am saying I will be glad to dumb it down further for you.



AresMars -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 11:53:13 PM)

Gentleman, can we have an INFORMAL PEACE please?   [;)]




SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: Interface feedback (12/18/2007 11:59:26 PM)

Zen question for today....

If a user cannot be bothered to read a message before answering, then how can the programmer be bothered to predict which button the user will click and what action the user wants that to take. 

[sm=00000506.gif]

[sm=sterb032.gif][sm=00000939.gif]


There, I flamed myself - thus absolving you of having to do it.




MartNick -> RE: Interface feedback (12/19/2007 1:15:12 AM)

You are both indeed correct, but from different ways of looking at the screens provided.

The interface of the game should:

1. show which reinforcements you have yet to allocate and ...

2. take you to the Victory Conditions screen for the particular nation concerned and allow you to allocate them.

Lets hope all these issues can be addressed in time, and not nitpick too much.



lavisj -> RE: Interface feedback (12/20/2007 7:00:39 PM)

Murat,

I think you are missing the point that was being made:
Interface issues ARE game killers. Not in the sens that the game is unplayable, but in the sens that the game will not be played.



Mynok -> RE: Interface feedback (12/20/2007 7:07:39 PM)


And interfaces are also difficult to reach common ground on, as this thread shows. People react differently and like different styles.



Reverend Zombie -> RE: Interface feedback (12/20/2007 11:06:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

The top window asks you if you want to RETURN AND PLACE. The second one asks if you want to PROCEED. As far as the english language is concerned they are correct and consistent. Again, this is only a trap for people who do not watch what they are doing. Many programs, especially with EULAs, switch up the messages above the botton to force people to pay attention to what they are actually clicking on and agreeing to.


Why in the world would anyone want to play a game where a EULA is the model for the interface???[&:]



Murat -> RE: Interface feedback (12/21/2007 2:28:35 AM)

Seriously, if you cannot take the time to read a popup then don't play the game, any game. If you just click the popups without reading them then you deserve whatever happens. I never said EULA was the model for the interface my point was that people should pay attention to what they are doing and varied interfaces (like the left button not always bieng the positive result) is conducive to this, which is a benefit.



Reverend Zombie -> RE: Interface feedback (12/21/2007 5:08:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

Seriously, if you cannot take the time to read a popup then don't play the game, any game. If you just click the popups without reading them then you deserve whatever happens.


Well, any game that has a punishing interface deserves to lose customers. I haven't bought EiA yet, and can't say that your defense of the game is doing it any favors.

The issue is not so much "not reading the popup" as it is inadvertently clicking the wrong button to confirm from force of habit.



Thresh -> RE: Interface feedback (12/21/2007 10:14:04 PM)

this interface is far from punishing.  if a player can't be bothered to read what is in front of him and would rather just click away, i fail to see how thats the programmers fault.

Todd



zaquex -> RE: Interface feedback (12/21/2007 11:20:44 PM)

Game interface inconsistency might not be a flaw in your eyes, you might be happy if there is 50 copies of the game sold to 50 hardcore PBEM devotees. 

I would however be surprised if the developers that have invested time and money in this product share your view and its unnecisary to attack people that tries to help the developers to improve this product.



Grapeshot Bob -> RE: Interface feedback (12/22/2007 12:26:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

Here's an example of pop-up windows which are inconsistent. These are displayed sequentially. In the Reinforcement phase, first you see this one:

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/yes_means_no.jpg[/image]

In this case YES means NO. If you click YES you DO NOT PROCEED.

The next window is shown right after that one. In this case, YES means PROCEED.

[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/blackbellamy/yes_means_yes.jpg[/image]

YES should always mean "go ahead". NO should always mean "cancel action".






I agree with this point.

In the first case the consequence of the action is more clearly spelled out. If you exit you will lose factors (except naval).

In the second case the action should have the consequence more clearly spelled out. "If you exit now you will have no preset victory conditions defined for this conflict. Would you like to return and select preset victory conditions? Yes. No." Or something like it might be more appropriate. Perhaps preset victory conditions are not necessary but only predetermine the outcome of a conflict once you win or lose? If so, that information should be explicitly stated.

I'd like to weigh in on the "friendliness of the user interface debate". Some of us are new to the EiA universe. We may have never played the board game. Don't forget that the user interface is how we experience the game. It IS the game. If the user interface is the least bit confusing you risk losing your fan base. I have beta tested games in the past and user interfaces can make or break a game. If the user interface seems buggy or idiosynratic, people think the game is buggy or idiosyncratic. Would you buy a car of the driver's side door opened backwards at night and forwards during the day?

Making the consequences of a decision clear to the user is a good thing. It is very easy for a programmer to type the consequences of a decision into the game engine. Why make it confusing to understand?

Believe me, if people volunteer that there is something confusing about a game interface there will be at least 10 others who will say nothing. The guys who say nothing will likely remember that Matrix games are hard to understand. If they do, they might just look someplace else for their next purchase.

I say this with all due respect. I'm liking this game and I just want to help improve it.




GSB



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375