1095 replies to this topic

[Silent]

Chronojam, on 30 November 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

You dare suggest they not schedule a test during Thanksgiving, the busiest travel/vacation period of the year in the United States?

Hey buddy it's not a holiday in Canada. Except when the community doesn't have anything positive to say about an update or test.

Then it's always a holiday and PGI can never be reached for comment.

[Rina Fujimoto]

You know, watching Homeless Bills video really hurt deep down, how could it be so BAD? HOW? I know it's still in development but god, after one month, I can understand in-game mechanics, those take time, they're hard to do because they actually affect the game, but a UI? A simple UI? The more I wracked my brain trying to figure out how you could even make something so horrendously clusmy, the more confused I got, but then I saw something on the official PGI website that might explain why UI 2.0 is how it is...

[dudebot]

haruko, on 30 November 2013 - 10:46 PM, said:

In mid-2009, Piranha Games Inc. released a trailer for MechWarrior targeted for a PC/console release.

Don't worry, that was just their original position four and a half years ago. Surely it has changed since then.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

TanE, on 30 November 2013 - 04:26 AM, said:

Thanks for the feedback! I made some more improvements on basis of Mikens changes of my first idea:



I added and changed the colours in the navigation bar, proper coloured the frames around the weapon icon/buttons and added some important buttons, that should be implemented (did I say shortcuts? ).

I think the triangles for the hardpoints are Ok, but I didn't changed that here.

Can we have this mechlab instead of that {Scrap} which is now in UI 2.0 pretty please?

[Tahribator]

MWO in its current state is too hardcore for consoles. They need to water it down significantly if they want to release on consoles. They surely have another game in the pipe for the next-gen.

[wickwire]

So they are dumbing down the UI for a console relase? I shouldn't have bought that last MC package...

[Thorn Hallis]

wickwire, on 01 December 2013 - 02:12 AM, said:

So they are dumbing down the UI for a console relase? I shouldn't have bought that last MC package...

What makes you think that?

[Rhys Erlykov]

Using Smurfys with a controller is pretty easy. Left stick switches sections of the mech. Right stick moves menu up and down and switches between lists with left and right. Buttons used to place/remove parts.

The UI is terrible regardless of what context it is looked at.

[Rhys Erlykov]

Its an annoyance, however. I'll accept whatever **** pile they produce if it means they'll add the metagame we've been wanting.

[Rippthrough]

Saxie, on 29 November 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:

I would have left feedback if I think it mattered.

This, 18 months have told us before that 200 pages of feedback gets largely ignored anyway, why bother?

[Archtype]

I am actually really bothered by a few things in UI 2.0, not the least of which is the Wall of iconography which adds nothing to the experience. At least in MW:T such a display conveys additional information. This feels clunky and certainly not to be an improvement, so much as a lateral shift. Most of this information is still better conveyed by Smurfy.net's independently developed mech lab.

Smurfy has been an indispensable tool since the hyperpulse generators went silent. *hurk* sorry, that was too much. What I meant to say is that smurfy provides an incredible amount of information in an informative and interesting way. PGI does not; in fact Smurfy exists due to PGI's startling decision to make information warfare, not a part of the player experience in combat, but part of learning how to play the game.

In fact a lot of unpopularity on their part could have been avoided by documenting their game for new players instead of putting in hill humping 3PV. I for one hope that in the end UI2.0 ends up at least being more popular that 3PV, but WTF do i know? I live on an island.

Please PGI, Make sure this all gets translated more clearly before it goes live. Issues with upgrades not being clearly still part of the MECHLAB purchase feels a bit weak on your part. This a problem you had addressed in the past, your confusing and unclear new system has resulted in tons of feedback on this.

Honestly the whole new tabbing system should go. Bring the paper doll back in for easy navigation of the mech components. There is not a reason in the world that should have disappeared, Unless of course your plan is to give us an entire paper-doll to drag and mount to (a la smurfy). That would be like hoping for HSR fixes, or maybe getting rid of pinpoint convergence though, pipe dreams are lovely to have.

Edited by Archtype, 01 December 2013 - 07:45 AM.

[EoRaptor]

UI2.0: Where to begin....

It seems a lot of work needs to be done on UI 2.0 to make it usable day to day. Several areas are very poorly laid out, and some interactions don't provide the feedback required for a person to make a decision.



The Home Screen:

I'm hoping the giant blank area eventually gets populated with something. I'm guessing it's the placeholder for the ad/rss streams. You should put a placeholder box there or something.

'Mechlab' and 'Select Mech' are the same button and go to the same place. Eliminate 'Select Mech' and rename 'Mechlab' to 'Battlemechs'. It's more descriptive of where you are going (as the mechlab is actually hidden under the 'configure' button)

Skills structured cascading drop downs are good, but the mech tree 'all' screen should have 'bars' that divide the list into light, medium, heavy, assault. ( I can't actually unlock anything though ). The Pilot tree is much better, and I prefer the label 'unlock' rather than the uninformative lock icon. Eliminate the 'efficiency unlocked' dialog though, it's useless, as that information is already clearly displayed.



Select Mech Screen:

Rename 'All' to 'Owned' and eliminate the trial mechs from this screen.

Limit the width to three or four mechs, and place EACH mech class on its own row (stalker gets two), even if you only own one or two of that chassis.

Make the pop-out info bigger and more readable

Mechs aren't orderable . Group the mechs by order of tonnage, lightest to heaviest, with header bars. Twists on the bars to let user hide or show a weight class quickly.


Mechlab (aka Configure):

Consider renaming the button from configure to mechlab.

It should jump right into loadout. The extra step/click isn't needed. These buttons should always be visible, too.


Loadout:

Oh god, those engines. Just no. You have great artists, but a giant field of IDENTICAL graphics to select distinct items is really bad. Give me two tabs, STD and XL at the top, and set of numbered twists for every 25 tons that is applicable to the selected mech (ie: 275, 300, 325, 350). Clicking on the twist expands out the engines within that rating group. The only info that is displayed is engine size, tonnage and price. Use the graphics in the expanded info fly out. Make it at least distinct for STD and XL.

Same for weapons, etc. I'd redo this whole section. Having only the weapons possible for a section is good, but it's still clunky. This is an artifact of trying to have the mech dictate what can be equipped, and have what can be equipped dictate what of the mech is shown. Pick one, and stick with it.

Instead, have the mech stand in isometric view, and have weapon/item type selectors on the left. Selecting a type 'slices' the mech apart, showing a layer with only those hardpoints highlighted. I need to draw a picture of this, it's too wordy to describe.

The invalid label is useless. Red is fine, but the label should be the reason (no hardpoint, no tonnoge, no slots).


Upgrades:

Confusing layout, group them together by type in some way.


Weapon Groups:

If you don't save your mech before clicking this, you are given the option to save, which is good. If you mech is invalid in some way, it tells you that but then leaves you in limbo, unable to go anywhere. (adding FF and Endo to the JR7-D(F) is all it takes to replicate this)


Client:

Unless you alt-F4, you need ot log out and then quit. Just give us a quit option from the logout button.

[Cyberiad]

Wasn't this what the new mechlab was supposed to look like? What happenend?

[Hastur Azargo]

I'm still hoping that we'll eventually get smurfy view in UI 2.0 as an option. After all, PGI does listen sometimes. *fingers crossed*

[Banditman]

SiliconLife, on 01 December 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

Wasn't this what the new mechlab was supposed to look like? What happenend?

Amen.

[Kraven Kor]

Where are all those most-asked for UI features?

Strip mech? Max armor? Save / load configuration?

[ToxinTractor]

Kraven Kor, on 03 December 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Where are all those most-asked for UI features?

Strip mech? Max armor? Save / load configuration?

Maybe a reset armor to default value button.. Of course if your mech is too heavy for the default armor then make it display a warning or a notification that you need to remove some stuff for that to work.

[DOMDOM]

6-months of dev time on a UI and this is the end result?

I'm grossly unimpressed and incredibly disappointed. To have spent so much time and gotten the mechlab so wrong... it's very frustrating. I have a hard time wrapping my head around this. How many people are working on this? Putting in 40 hour work weeks? For months? And this is it?

End of the road for me and you PGI. I'll probably drop back in summer 2014 to have a look at community warfare, but I'll be honest... I don't have faith in your ability to properly execute this game.

[Heffay]

DOMDOM, on 07 December 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

6-months of dev time on a UI and this is the end result?

I'm grossly unimpressed and incredibly disappointed. To have spent so much time and gotten the mechlab so wrong... it's very frustrating. I have a hard time wrapping my head around this. How many people are working on this? Putting in 40 hour work weeks? For months? And this is it?

End of the road for me and you PGI. I'll probably drop back in summer 2014 to have a look at community warfare, but I'll be honest... I don't have faith in your ability to properly execute this game.

This isn't just a user interface update. It's more accurately called MWO 2.0. The current system is more of a proof of concept build that they extended as far as it feasibly can go.

[CrashieJ]

Heffay, on 29 October 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

Yes, but it WASN'T, which is why they need UI 2.0. This is essentially a rewrite of the entire game. That is why it is taking so long.

I just had to dig through all the other posts for this one.

So you're basically by your tune, Microsoft Word 2014 is an entirely different object from MSWord 2013, and 2012, just because it looks a bit different and they added a few new extra buttons.

they're adding another coat of paint on a car Heffay, not ripping out it's engine and replacing it.