Thread: Re: [TuxKart-devel] GUI (Page 2)
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
sjbaker
From: Charles G. <ch...@ve...> - 2004-07-01 03:02:52
|
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 14:56 -0600, Ryan Flegel wrote: > Just wanted to point out some obvious(?) advantages to SWS approach. > > * With the SWS approach we can have previews of what each character > and each track looks like before choosing. This would be a total mess > using the MWS approach. > * For things like multiplayer character select it will be really messy > having 4 people choose their characters on a screen with all sorts of > other options there. With the SWS approach we have a nice, intuitive > way for all players to select their characters. > * After a race is complete, usually the only thing that you want to > change is the track. While this can still easily be done with the MWS > approach, it confronts the users with a lot of unecessary options. * People expect the SWS approach with games, and will find the MWS approach alien and hence ungame-like. -- - Charlie Charles Goodwin <ch...@ve...> Online @ www.charlietech.com |
From: Steve B. <sjb...@ai...> - 2004-07-01 04:11:25
|
Ryan Flegel wrote: > Just wanted to point out some obvious(?) advantages to SWS approach. > > * With the SWS approach we can have previews of what each character > and each track looks like before choosing. This would be a total mess > using the MWS approach. Why? A scrolling list of tracks or character is easy to do - and common even in console games. I don't see where it's a mess. > * After a race is complete, usually the only thing that you want to > change is the track. Again, why? MWS makes it easy to change any, all or none of those things and be back playing again in one more mouse click. SWS utterly sucks if you want to change more than the obvious one or two things the game designer THOUGHT you wanted to change. > While this can still easily be done with the MWS > approach, it confronts the users with a lot of unecessary options. I don't see that's a problem. If the options are not something you want to change, don't change them and they'll be the same they were last time you played. ---------------------------- Steve Baker ------------------------- HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...> WorkEmail: <sj...@li...> HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M- V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++ -----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- |
From: Ingo R. <gr...@gm...> - 2004-07-01 09:26:32
|
Steve Baker <sjb...@ai...> writes: > Again, why? MWS makes it easy to change any, all or none of those things > and be back playing again in one more mouse click. SWS utterly sucks > if you want to change more than the obvious one or two things the game > designer THOUGHT you wanted to change. My biggest problem with MWS is that I have no freaking idea how it should work. If you have TimeTrial, GrandPrix and QuickRace and a whole bunch of multiplayer modes you have only very few options that overlap each and every mode and a whole bunch of others that are mode specific. How do you deal with that, constantly disable/enable, hide/unhide a bunch of GUI widgets, wouldn't that completly confuse players? The other issue is with multiplayer, I want to select my kart myself, I don't want to talk to the guy at the mouse to select the right one for me. MWS would really slow this down a lot, compared to SWS where everybody could select their own kart in paralell. Even every PC game I know does SWS for character, track selection and such. -- WWW: http://pingus.seul.org/~grumbel/ JabberID: gr...@ja... ICQ: 59461927 |
From: Ryan F. <rf...@gm...> - 2004-07-01 10:33:19
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:13:15 -0500, Steve Baker <sjb...@ai...> wrote: > > Ryan Flegel wrote: > > Just wanted to point out some obvious(?) advantages to SWS approach. > > > > * With the SWS approach we can have previews of what each character > > and each track looks like before choosing. This would be a total mess > > using the MWS approach. > > Why? A scrolling list of tracks or character is easy to do - and common > even in console games. I don't see where it's a mess. it's only a mess if we try to give graphical previews of what each character/track looks like. This is a really nice option to have, especially when choosing multiplayer characters (see below). > > * After a race is complete, usually the only thing that you want to > > change is the track. > > Again, why? MWS makes it easy to change any, all or none of those things > and be back playing again in one more mouse click. SWS utterly sucks > if you want to change more than the obvious one or two things the game > designer THOUGHT you wanted to change. Yes, you *can* change all those things, but there's no point in confronting the player with all those options. > > While this can still easily be done with the MWS > > approach, it confronts the users with a lot of unecessary options. > > I don't see that's a problem. If the options are not something > you want to change, don't change them and they'll be the same they > were last time you played. As Ingo pointed out, not all options belong to all the different playable modes. On top of that, it's still not necessary to confront the users with all of these options. I do realize that these arguments aren't hardcore evidence of the way the menu should be laid out. However, I do believe this(SWS) is the most *intuitive* way to do the menu, and that it simply doesn't make sense to use the MWS approach, especially in the case of character choosing for multiplayer--it becomes a real mess with multiplayer. -- Ryan |
From: Ricardo C. <ri...@ae...> - 2004-07-01 11:07:21
|
Em Quarta, 30 de Junho de 2004 21:56, o Ryan Flegel escreveu: > Just wanted to point out some obvious(?) advantages to SWS approach. > > * With the SWS approach we can have previews of what each character > and each track looks like before choosing. This would be a total mess > using the MWS approach. The only disadvantage a MWS approach would have in that case is that one would have to design it before implementing it. Else, yes, it could be a mess. > * For things like multiplayer character select it will be really messy > having 4 people choose their characters on a screen with all sorts of > other options there. With the SWS approach we have a nice, intuitive > way for all players to select their characters. It isn't 8 or 80. We can still have a dialog that would allow players to change a few stuff, choosing them by turns. > * After a race is complete, usually the only thing that you want to > change is the track. While this can still easily be done with the MWS > approach, it confronts the users with a lot of unecessary options. The track change would only happen in the Practice mode. In any other, it should only show statistics, and maybe allowing the player to abort. Ricardo -- You will become rich and famous unless you don't. |
From: Ryan F. <rf...@gm...> - 2004-07-03 20:30:22
|
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:11:43 +0100, Ricardo Cruz <ri...@ae...> wrote: > Em Quarta, 30 de Junho de 2004 21:56, o Ryan Flegel escreveu: > > Just wanted to point out some obvious(?) advantages to SWS approach. > > > > * With the SWS approach we can have previews of what each character > > and each track looks like before choosing. This would be a total mess > > using the MWS approach. > > The only disadvantage a MWS approach would have in that case is that one > would have to design it before implementing it. Else, yes, it could be a > mess. > > > * For things like multiplayer character select it will be really messy > > having 4 people choose their characters on a screen with all sorts of > > other options there. With the SWS approach we have a nice, intuitive > > way for all players to select their characters. > > It isn't 8 or 80. We can still have a dialog that would allow players to > change a few stuff, choosing them by turns. Well, if we have a previews for 8 cars, that's pretty much the whole screen. Choosing them by turns is an unnecessary waste of time. > > * After a race is complete, usually the only thing that you want to > > change is the track. While this can still easily be done with the MWS > > approach, it confronts the users with a lot of unecessary options. > > The track change would only happen in the Practice mode. In any other, it > should only show statistics, and maybe allowing the player to abort. No.. they'll all have the ability to go back and select the track except grand prix (since it's already predetermined). -- Ryan |
From: Steve B. <sjb...@ai...> - 2004-07-01 04:15:25
|
Charles Goodwin wrote: > * People expect the SWS approach with games, and will find the MWS > approach alien and hence ungame-like. These are not console users. They aren't people of subnormal intellect. These are Linux desktop users. Geez! ---------------------------- Steve Baker ------------------------- HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...> WorkEmail: <sj...@li...> HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M- V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++ -----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- |
From: Charles G. <ch...@ve...> - 2004-07-01 05:23:06
|
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 23:17 -0500, Steve Baker wrote: > Charles Goodwin wrote: > > * People expect the SWS approach with games, and will find the MWS > > approach alien and hence ungame-like. > > These are not console users. They aren't people of subnormal intellect. > These are Linux desktop users. Geez! I hope you're being sarcastic. It's exactly that attitude that keeps Linux desktop users being people who do not have "subnormal intellect". Personally I prefer the term "uneducated with computers". -- - Charlie Charles Goodwin <ch...@ve...> Online @ www.charlietech.com |