Page 7 of 10 First 356789 Last
Results 91 to 105 of 140

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: Hyperspace button

  1. #91
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Folks!
    Just thought I'd pop my tuppence-worth into this thread, so you can get a little information straight from the horse's mouth, as it were.

    Bindings
    It's important to note that although using the cockpit interface shares standard game menu interface elements, navigating it is part and parcel of game play.

    So, whilst still being an incredibly important aspect, making it as easy to use and invisible as possible is not the *only* goal. There are elements of player skill and drama (basically, game play) that we feel sometimes justify interactions that can validly conflict with ease of use, at least to a degree.
    ...

    What sort of artistic expression is being made by those side-menus? Are you creating a super-minimalistic clean game where the interface must remain hidden? Are you pushing the limits of a game-type by calling attention to non-standard interface methods, like a Tales RPG or the first two Ar Tonlicos? Are you producing a period sim intended for the hardcore market, like a Silent Hunter?

    Or, well, are you creating an interface handicap for the large number of people with less-functional interfaces? If you don't want players with options available to them in real-time, don't solve the issue by hiding said options. Either remove them, or have them progress over a period of time.

    There used to be a term for games that made defeating the interface a part of gameplay. it was called 'bad.' If you are adopting a necessary evil for some players to players with more functional interface devices, you are not improving the game for those who do have them. Allow good players to be good at your game.

  2. #92
    Originally Posted by Eyota Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    I go along with this ..

    In aerodynamic flight especially (and probably in ED, as bad news if shot away)
    it's more or less; WARNING: landing gear is down?
    I think that moreover landing with the landing gear retracted would not be a career enhancing move.

    off topic - the first time I travelled in the front lower deck of a 747 the noise of the nose landing gear retracting after takeoff scared the heck out of me. I thought the whole aircraft was tearing apart.

  3. #93
    Originally Posted by Shishakli View Post (Source)
    I think we have a winner!!
    Seriously? asking players to go into a config file to bind keys? As a last resort maybe. But I would much rather have a menu so I can play about in game with my set-up. It's not great design to have to get your player base to come out of a game to make changes of any kind.

  4. #94
    Originally Posted by Yaffle View Post (Source)
    off topic - the first time I travelled in the front lower deck of a 747 the noise of the nose landing gear retracting after takeoff scared the heck out of me. I thought the whole aircraft was tearing apart.
    Off topic ; If God had intended man to fly ....
    (He would not have invented Spanish Air Traffic Control ~ Dave Lister,)

    Originally Posted by Yaffle View Post (Source)
    I think that moreover landing with the landing gear retracted would not be a career enhancing move.
    "Falcon De Lacy bears no responsibility whatsoever for pilots attempting to land with their gear up"
    ~ I think I saw in a video that, do you get, a (gear is up) warning near a landing pad in Alpha 3.? That shows pretty highly intelligent AI in my book.
    I might have gone the other way actually, and make it a pilot's responsibility to always check, with Chock's warning light on the board.

  5. #95
    Originally Posted by Eyota Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    "Falcon De Lacy bears no responsibility whatsoever for pilots attempting to land with their gear up"
    ~ I think I saw in a video that, do you get, a (gear is up) warning near a landing pad in Alpha 3.? That shows pretty highly intelligent AI in my book.
    I might have gone the other way actually, and make it a pilot's responsibility to always check, with Chock's warning light on the board.
    I am sure it is apocryphal, but a friend of mine who worked on the Eurofighter told me that it has voice feedback. Or had, this was about year 2 of 327 into its development. Anyway, it was based roughly on the Austin Maestro's female voice. The Austin would tell you such things as "seatbelt not fastened". In the Eurofighter it would tell you as you came in to land "landing gear not deployed". Assuming you did go on to land, and crash and burn the message would become "told you so."

  6. #96
    Originally Posted by Yaffle View Post (Source)
    I am sure it is apocryphal, but a friend of mine who worked on the Eurofighter told me that it has voice feedback. Or had, this was about year 2 of 327 into its development. Anyway, it was based roughly on the Austin Maestro's female voice. The Austin would tell you such things as "seatbelt not fastened". In the Eurofighter it would tell you as you came in to land "landing gear not deployed". Assuming you did go on to land, and crash and burn the message would become "told you so."
    Haha .. typical female!?
    (shh .. I did NOT say that!!)

    See? (logic!)

  7. #97
    Originally Posted by Kofiman View Post (Source)
    ...

    What sort of artistic expression is being made by those side-menus? Are you creating a super-minimalistic clean game where the interface must remain hidden? Are you pushing the limits of a game-type by calling attention to non-standard interface methods, like a Tales RPG or the first two Ar Tonlicos? Are you producing a period sim intended for the hardcore market, like a Silent Hunter?

    Or, well, are you creating an interface handicap for the large number of people with less-functional interfaces? If you don't want players with options available to them in real-time, don't solve the issue by hiding said options. Either remove them, or have them progress over a period of time.

    There used to be a term for games that made defeating the interface a part of gameplay. it was called 'bad.' If you are adopting a necessary evil for some players to players with more functional interface devices, you are not improving the game for those who do have them. Allow good players to be good at your game.
    +1 to that.

    There is a difference between an efficient UI that can be used in a complex manner to create a genuine feeling of immersion, and a UI that is intentionally difficult to use in order to mimic a feeling of complexity. The former invites interaction and the development of skilful gameplay - it is a pleasure to use. The latter is just an obstacle to interaction and an annoyance, and in the end it kills immersion rather than conjuring it.

  8. #98
    Originally Posted by Kofiman View Post (Source)
    ...
    There used to be a term for games that made defeating the interface a part of gameplay. it was called 'bad.' If you are adopting a necessary evil for some players to players with more functional interface devices, you are not improving the game for those who do have them. Allow good players to be good at your game.
    Originally Posted by Hellhawk666 View Post (Source)
    +1 to that.

    There is a difference between an efficient UI that can be used in a complex manner to create a genuine feeling of immersion, and a UI that is intentionally complex in order to mimic a feeling of complexity. The former invites interaction and the development of skilful gameplay - it is a pleasure to use. The latter is just an obstacle to interaction and an annoyance.
    Gentlemen... may I recommend sharing ideas for improvements or preferences over grandiose statements. It's not that I disagree with the principles of said statements, but I think we have seen within this thread that it pays to be constructive over critical.

  9. #99
    Originally Posted by Yaffle View Post (Source)
    I am sure it is apocryphal, but a friend of mine who worked on the Eurofighter told me that it has voice feedback. Or had, this was about year 2 of 327 into its development. Anyway, it was based roughly on the Austin Maestro's female voice. The Austin would tell you such things as "seatbelt not fastened". In the Eurofighter it would tell you as you came in to land "landing gear not deployed". Assuming you did go on to land, and crash and burn the message would become "told you so."
    What was the voice message for "your voice feedback system has been rendered inoperable, please remember not to rely exclusively on it"?

  10. #100
    Originally Posted by noodle View Post (Source)
    What was the voice message for "your voice feedback system has been rendered inoperable, please remember not to rely exclusively on it"?
    and Oh My God ..
    [REQUEST] .. though, please note; for much later

    a short circuit gave me an erroneous warning lights!

    (one step beyond probably ; though .. I wonder ...
    "Fellow multiplayer/ station control?? I have been in battle ..
    can you please visually confirm that my landing gear really is down? the light is blinking on and off ..")

  11. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #101
    Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous Frontier Employee
    Hello folks!

    Firstly, thanks for the comments. Agree or disagree, it's good to get different opinions.

    I take onboard concerns about the interface. The cool thing about this alpha process is that we can get useful feedback during development where action can be taken.

    The interface is likely to be tweaked further because A) not all features of the game are implemented and B) it's a touchy-feely thing (quite literally in some aspects!)

    Obviously I don't really agree that we're actively attempting to add bad game play! As with all design though, there is an amount of subjectivity; decisions we make will be liked by some, loathed by others.

    I can't promise that we will please everyone. But though we are basing our decisions on goals we've set, we are also measuring the results against feedback received. I'd also finally add that if possible it's worth spending some time with the interface before giving it up for dead based on convention alone

  12. #102
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    ...I'd also finally add that if possible it's worth spending some time with the interface before giving it up for dead based on convention alone
    My comments requesting additional bindings are based on my experience with the UI panel interface.

  13. #103
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    The cool thing about this alpha process is that we can get useful feedback during development where action can be taken.
    a big thumbs up to that ..

    (I seem to have bunked off work this afternoon,
    in favour of this thread I suddenly realise,
    never mind I don't get paid well anyway!)

    an intruiging mix this .. cockpit buttoning ..
    natural subsystem ...
    coupled with visual design (alerts) ..
    coupled with accessibility, on scenario ..
    and (as thread shows) RE-coupled to PC/ gamepad interface ..



    Originally Posted by Razorwire View Post (Source)
    My comments requesting additional bindings are based on my experience with the UI panel interface.

  14. #104
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello folks!

    Firstly, thanks for the comments. Agree or disagree, it's good to get different opinions.

    I take onboard concerns about the interface. The cool thing about this alpha process is that we can get useful feedback during development where action can be taken.

    The interface is likely to be tweaked further because A) not all features of the game are implemented and B) it's a touchy-feely thing (quite literally in some aspects!)

    Obviously I don't really agree that we're actively attempting to add bad game play! As with all design though, there is an amount of subjectivity; decisions we make will be liked by some, loathed by others.

    I can't promise that we will please everyone. But though we are basing our decisions on goals we've set, we are also measuring the results against feedback received. I'd also finally add that if possible it's worth spending some time with the interface before giving it up for dead based on convention alone
    Thanks for commenting Sandy, we (well I at least) appreciate that the team takes the time to look at this feedback and consider it.

    I don't think it's possible to please everyone (there should be a saying about that) but I do think you've taken the right approach to pause and consider what the user base is saying.

  15. #105
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello folks!

    Firstly, thanks for the comments. Agree or disagree, it's good to get different opinions.

    I take onboard concerns about the interface. The cool thing about this alpha process is that we can get useful feedback during development where action can be taken.

    The interface is likely to be tweaked further because A) not all features of the game are implemented and B) it's a touchy-feely thing (quite literally in some aspects!)
    Hi Sandro,
    I am sure you guys realise that when the rabid masses get tetchy it is just us showing our love and enthusiasm for the project.

    Similarly I have found that if a poster is polite and rounded in in their opinions the only thing that tends to happen is no one replies/comments! Lol...

    (I don't mean the devs, just full stop)

    So its no wonder a few resort to a more "to the point" approach to get a good debate going.

    I look forward to seeing the additional systems come online and what that will mean for the side panel interfaces. I predict those clamouring for a key bind option for landing gear no longer using that key once we find something more important we need to bind instead!!

    No in all seriousness I will look forward to getting a fuller feel for the design and being able to provide more suitable feedback.

    I will for now just stick with my general feeling that if I feel that I am ok being stationary or cruising a longer distance and have the time, i am happy to interface with menus.

    When I am flying and thinking about all the elements included, i would rather not.

    That is my guiding principle behind feeding back my thoughts on the layout of the UI.

    I will also see if my feelings change once I have the Oculus Rift DevKit2.

    EDIT: Went over my videos again, the UI for the Station is inside the ship, bloody remembered it wrong, twonk.

    And thank you very much for the responses so far.