Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Update design discontinuity

  1. #1

    Update design discontinuity

    There is a huge amount of new content coming our way very soon, including a host of new mechanics that will significantly transform game play.

    My observations of the interfaces present in the Exploration changes, and in the Mining changes reflect very different graphical and philosophical approaches to their respective packages. From my point of view, the experiences appear to be constructed by different teams with inconsistency in the GUI.

    Furthermore, the spectrographic analysis approach to astronomic features could have been easily applied to mining materials within asteroids. (After all, spectroscopic analysis is the bedrock of material evaluation). The pulse scanner effect is visually apealing, and might have been an interesting representation of the honk/FSS startup within a system. Looks like a minimum of cross talk between the dev groups.

    From a design perspective, the vibe I'm getting is one of disjointed parts without an integrated global GUI theme.

    Though it may be too late,

    I certainly hope that Chapter 4 takes a moment to be a bit more integrated in its GUI design.

  2. #2
    Originally Posted by Commander Danicus View Post (Source)
    There is a huge amount of new content coming our way very soon, including a host of new mechanics that will significantly transform game play.

    My observations of the interfaces present in the Exploration changes, and in the Mining changes reflect very different graphical and philosophical approaches to their respective packages. From my point of view, the experiences appear to be constructed by different teams with inconsistency in the GUI.

    Furthermore, the spectrographic analysis approach to astronomic features could have been easily applied to mining materials within asteroids. (After all, spectroscopic analysis is the bedrock of material evaluation). The pulse scanner effect is visually apealing, and might have been an interesting representation of the honk/FSS startup within a system. Looks like a minimum of cross talk between the dev groups.

    From a design perspective, the vibe I'm getting is one of disjointed parts without an integrated global GUI theme.

    Though it may be too late,

    I certainly hope that Chapter 4 takes a moment to be a bit more integrated in its GUI design.
    You mean, the dev's don't play their own game?

  3. #3
    I can't be the only one molested with the ship view on the right panel, buttons all over and a nice graphic star-type shape, when every other tab in the game is either a list or a grid, or both at the same time.

  4. #4
    This lack of consistent UI issue has been going on for ages, the example that has irked me for ages is the galmap filters, where some of the more recent additions use a perfectly good layout, but one that is different from the others. It's the kind of thing I had hoped would be rationalised in the Beyond series of updates.

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by ilo View Post (Source)
    molested with
    I kind of get you, but I can’t tell if you’re enjoying it or not.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Commander Danicus View Post (Source)
    There is a huge amount of new content coming our way very soon, including a host of new mechanics that will significantly transform game play.

    My observations of the interfaces present in the Exploration changes, and in the Mining changes reflect very different graphical and philosophical approaches to their respective packages. From my point of view, the experiences appear to be constructed by different teams with inconsistency in the GUI.

    Furthermore, the spectrographic analysis approach to astronomic features could have been easily applied to mining materials within asteroids. (After all, spectroscopic analysis is the bedrock of material evaluation). The pulse scanner effect is visually apealing, and might have been an interesting representation of the honk/FSS startup within a system. Looks like a minimum of cross talk between the dev groups.

    From a design perspective, the vibe I'm getting is one of disjointed parts without an integrated global GUI theme.

    Though it may be too late,

    I certainly hope that Chapter 4 takes a moment to be a bit more integrated in its GUI design.
    Look at ship variants. It makes totally sense to use a design for multiple purposes, happens in real life all the time. People though complain about "lazy developers" and bla bla bla. I am pretty sure they made scanner mechanics so different from each other to not make people think they would just use the same mechanics for everything. "Look, mining scanner is the same as the SRV-scanner/discovery scanner! That's so lazyyyy." when it's just the best way to approach the matter.
    I would love if they would always go for the scientifically best solution and just ignore the players who don't like it. Perhaps the community would be smaller then, but well, I won't miss anybody I guess.

  7. #7
    Have to agree with the OP.

    To me, it kind of feels like we're flying ships with (metaphorically speaking) a Windows OS but which also has Android and IOS sub-systems and some legacy Win-CE parts too.

    I actually wouldn't mind that if the inconsistency was, erm, consistent.
    If there was something that created the impression that you were bodging incompatible modules together in order to get a ship to fly (think Millennium Falcon) then I'd be more comfortable with it.
    As it is, we're in a universe where every ship shares the same flight-controls and displays and yet the sub-systems within that common UI are a mismatched dog's dinner of styles.

    And, as said above, I was really hoping that tidying some of this stuff up would have been part of a year dedicated to "consolidating core gameplay elements".

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Valorin View Post (Source)
    Look at ship variants. It makes totally sense to use a design for multiple purposes, happens in real life all the time. People though complain about "lazy developers" and bla bla bla. I am pretty sure they made scanner mechanics so different from each other to not make people think they would just use the same mechanics for everything. "Look, mining scanner is the same as the SRV-scanner/discovery scanner! That's so lazyyyy." when it's just the best way to approach the matter.
    I would love if they would always go for the scientifically best solution and just ignore the players who don't like it. Perhaps the community would be smaller then, but well, I won't miss anybody I guess.
    I'm not suggesting at all that the Devs are lazy. I'm suggesting that there isn't a coordinating design principle at work. The work is parsed to different micro teams, and then kludged together. The individual concepts are stovepipes.

    Not that Apple is awesome or anything, but you definitely feel the hand of uniform design within their products. Even with the diverse styles in IKEA products, you still feel something that connects them.

    It would be cool if ZP or Gutamaya or CD had their own design within the GUI, but that would be a ton of work.

    As it stands we have one ship GUI that does not feel internally consistent, and it seems to become more fragmented with each update.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Commander Danicus View Post (Source)
    There is a huge amount of new content coming our way very soon, including a host of new mechanics that will significantly transform game play.

    My observations of the interfaces present in the Exploration changes, and in the Mining changes reflect very different graphical and philosophical approaches to their respective packages. From my point of view, the experiences appear to be constructed by different teams with inconsistency in the GUI.

    Furthermore, the spectrographic analysis approach to astronomic features could have been easily applied to mining materials within asteroids. (After all, spectroscopic analysis is the bedrock of material evaluation). The pulse scanner effect is visually apealing, and might have been an interesting representation of the honk/FSS startup within a system. Looks like a minimum of cross talk between the dev groups.

    From a design perspective, the vibe I'm getting is one of disjointed parts without an integrated global GUI theme.

    Though it may be too late,

    I certainly hope that Chapter 4 takes a moment to be a bit more integrated in its GUI design.
    Pretty much my impression as well. Though, if you watch carefully, you'll find inconsistencies even in the same chapters. They are usually just so minor that nobody talks about it, hence why they never will be harmonized. ED could really use some sort of 'design style consortium', like a meta instance that's always on the lookout for such inconsistencies and insist on their harmonization. No new design idea should go out without being arranged with such a consortium. As of now, the game feels like a conglomerate of units, all designed by talented pupils originate from different school classes.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by picommander View Post (Source)
    Pretty much my impression as well. Though, if you watch carefully, you'll find inconsistencies even in the same chapters. They are usually just so minor that nobody talks about it, hence why they never will be harmonized. ED could really use some sort of 'design style consortium', like a meta instance that's always on the lookout for such inconsistencies and insist on their harmonization. No new design idea should go out without being arranged with such a consortium. As of now, the game feels like a conglomerate of units, all designed by talented pupils originate from different school classes.
    I agree completely with this.