|
Aures -> RE: Wow...! (11/8/2010 8:43:10 AM)
|
Lol LoBaron. You should see the stuff I work with, either a meld of SQL with Foxpro or pure SQL with a bunch of .net interface stuff. Loads of fun, at least the table structures I work with are well suited for the purpose (although there are cases where you are trying to efficiently join back onto the same table half a dozen times or more). NAV is a financials/ERP package and the kind of flexibility it offers end users for viewing stuff (rather than people who actually know what they are doing making reports etc) is amazing. You can take a free online test drive if you are interested. It is the kind of stuff I would really love to see in interfaces for complex games. Getting into interface ergonomics has near ruined a whole bunch of games for me, the kind of thing that would have a business client refusing to accept the product is almost par for the course in games. When you think back to how logical and easy to use the interface for some old management games is (take your pick but I've got bullfrog games in mind atm, such a shame they are no longer with us) the quagmire of modern games is enough to make you tear your hair out. I for one did not find going through my list of agents every turn in Medieval Total War a fun experience. Scroll list, select unit, move unit, list regenerates and resets position to top (despite it being totally unnecessary as no information on the list has changed), scroll list until you find the next unit on the list, etc etc. Doing that 200 times a turn really sucks the fun out of stuff. Sadly there are a few cases where DW has similar issues. That the interface for DW is better than the vast majority of games with this level of complexity is more a testament to how backward the games industry is than to how good the interface in DW is (although in some areas the DW interface is nearly ideal and I wouldn't want to discount those).
|
|
|
|