165 replies to this topic

[fandre]

I would agree with Karl Streiger both MWO and smurfy do it wrong. But IMHO, smurfy is better and more intuitive to use than the actual mechlab.

Edited by fandre, 19 May 2014 - 06:41 AM.

[Roland]

Jade Kitsune, on 19 May 2014 - 05:36 AM, said:

What the hell is this obsession with "make it like smurfy's"

Smurfy's sucks.

Learn to use the tools given, the fact that you complain so much about it here, shows you haven't taken the time to learn the UI and would rather complain about what you want.

You're not getting UI 1.0 back, and you're not going to get anything like smurfy's, get over it.

Here's a pro-tip:
Good user designs don't require the user to invest any significant effort to learn how to use them.

Because the reality is this.. No one gets paid to play this game. When new users encounter the garbage which is UI 2.0, they just quit. There's no reason for them to invest time and effort to trudge through a terrible interface.

Tesunie, on 18 May 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

Even then, I'm willing to give PGI the benefit of the doubt that they didn't intentionally mislead people, at least until it could be proved otherwise.

Here's a breakdown of their statements regarding CW.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I don't quite get the Smurfy's hate...why does Smurfy's suck? One click to pull the mech up, one click to max the armor.

All the relevant information is on the screen (hardpoints, slots, upgrades, tonnage left, max engine).

Then you can sort through every item to put in the mech, and it even has the clever "used weapons only" for the ammo.

On top of that, it scales perfectly on my 60 inch TV, whereas UI2.0 is still a pain to read.

[Tesunie]

Amsro, on 19 May 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

Yes I agree, the game still works, there are less overall bugs in the new UI.

On the flip side this has taken them over a year to finish and when released is far from complete. Needs lots of work still. I pity new players trying to build mechs in the current UI, I'm glad I've done all that previously.

Need a toggle for (but not limited to);

-UI Sounds (these truly suck)
-Confirmation Dialogue Boxes (Yes I really do want to turn those off.)
-Social Tab (let me switch to a from the social tab with a key press, F3 perhaps)

The mechlab has too many layers, Smurpy style building can't come fast enough.

Have a popup (that fades away) on the screen telling you what friend(s) have logged on.

As well as a LogOut button have a Exit button right next to it.

Ahh whats the point, there was an ENTIRE page of feedback on the new UI with more points then I can remember in one post session. PGI ignored it then, they will ignore it now.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$



Ahh I get it, it is too simple and everything you need is RIGHT THERE!

So we agree, UI2.0 works and has some good points (with bugs) while at the same time could use more work.

I actually have found it very easy to make new mech designs in mechlab... It didn't take me long at all to figure out how it worked. It's click heavy, wastes a lot of screen space in some screens, and it also might be a little too compartmentalized/categorized in places. Overall, I think it's a good base... This I think you will find is opinion driven more than anything else for people. Some people will like it, others will hate it.

I will agree that a Smurfy lab would be better and easier to take to. I agree there as well.

The whole social tab could use to be reworked. I once had that little tab flashing and I didn't even notice it for probably a couple of matches! I felt so bad! They could easily take the middle right of the screen and have social messages pop up there and slowly fade away over time. (Might make for a good suggestion to make to PGI.)

Log out to Desktop I see as helpful, but a rather minor button to worry about. I can agree with it finding it's way in, but overall I'd rather have other things worked on. Though I'd like to say it sounds like a quick add in, I can't actually say that as I don't know how much work it would be to add in a single button. (If it is anything like doing so with flash... it isn't as easy as one would think!)

Just because they don't take and use every suggestion I don't think it is an indicator that they aren't listening to them. I think they listen to the suggestions, but they can't implement everyone's suggestions (obviously). I actually know of one person's suggestion that made it into the game! It involved a test with SSRMs and the amount of damage they cause, and how that damage was different for each chassis. It caused a change to SSRMs about a mistake that PGI was looking for and was unable to find themselves.


Right now, a lot of the "suggestions" I see are "demands" and come from a very offensive style of posting/suggesting. Personally, if someone walked up to me and demanded/insultingly demanded I made changes, I set in my kneels and buck them off. Especially when it comes to my art. I've told more than one art teacher who was "telling me I was doing it wrong" to go away and that I was not going to preform their suggestions. Why? Because they didn't word them nicely, I felt offended, and so I ignored them. No matter how helpful the advice might be, if it is presented in an offensive and hurtful manner, it's more likely to be ignored. (Guess why I'm saying we should stop arguing amongst ourselves with these threads were people feel they "have to defend" or "have to attack". We could be making threads that can be far more productive.)

At the moment, we all agree about one thing: UI2.0 needs more work.
We all seem to want to argue about everything else: How effective it is, how game breaking it is, how bad it is, how...
Instead of arguing the opinion side of the debate, we could instead be pulling out specific issues about each section of UI2.0 and try to provide a better environment (for ourselves) in discussing the problems at hand and even present as many solutions as possible to those problems. At the moment, we are all just running around in circles chasing each others tails. We as a community can be better than that.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

I don't quite get the Smurfy's hate...why does Smurfy's suck? One click to pull the mech up, one click to max the armor.

All the relevant information is on the screen (hardpoints, slots, upgrades, tonnage left, max engine).

Then you can sort through every item to put in the mech, and it even has the clever "used weapons only" for the ammo.

On top of that, it scales perfectly on my 60 inch TV, whereas UI2.0 is still a pain to read.

For the same reason some people like/hate/despise the current in game mechlab? Opinion. Preference. Comfort. Appeal.
(Just saying...)

[Reitrix]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

I don't quite get the Smurfy's hate...why does Smurfy's suck? One click to pull the mech up, one click to max the armor.

All the relevant information is on the screen (hardpoints, slots, upgrades, tonnage left, max engine).

Then you can sort through every item to put in the mech, and it even has the clever "used weapons only" for the ammo.

On top of that, it scales perfectly on my 60 inch TV, whereas UI2.0 is still a pain to read.

its preference. I don't like having everything stuffed into my face. You should see how my HDDs are organized, lol. Some features from Smurfy would a great addition to what UI2.0 does, like one click armor maxing, But i also like the ability to focus in one specific location when building it up.
I would prefer the Location buttons be attached to the model of the 'Mech, as i don't much like how it's ordered on the side, but overall i like the UI2.0, and dislike the presentation of Smurfy, thats pretty much all there is to it.

Functionally speaking, UI2.0 does exactly what it sets out to do, let you build a 'mech. No, its not the most efficient UI ever developed, it has a long way to go before it gets to be a great UI. Doesn't change that it's easy to use once you figure it out. Which is also easy to do, as it kinda guides you every step of the way.
Also, i can read the UI perfectly fine on my 42" TV, Probably just a resolution issue, which could be easily fixed in an update, which we also know are coming to UI2.0.

[Tesunie]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

On top of that, it scales perfectly on my 60 inch TV, whereas UI2.0 is still a pain to read.

As someone else just stated, it sounds like a resolution issue. Can you possibly change the resolution things render at? (Without degrading graphic game quality?)

[maniacos]

Roland, on 19 May 2014 - 07:05 AM, said:

Here's a pro-tip:
Good user designs don't require the user to invest any significant effort to learn how to use them.

As a programmer I know, UI design is one of the most controverse and difficult aspect in application developing. Normally it's also done by someone fulltime and several companies I know even employ tester with no technical background to test their interfaces.

But there is one rule of thumb, some smart interface-designers advise to their fellows: "Don't make me think!"

[Koniving]

Videos.

Old UI. Rebuilding a mech to become an LRM-Victor with red lasers and machine guns (got many kills at brawling ranges) before they were released via the public test server.


Section check of the Roflpult.


---------
First experiences in UI 2.0.



Benefits (and some flaw) of UI 2.0) (The 'flaw' existed in the old UI too).


UI 2.0 Rebuilding a mech (after learning it).


There's merits to both.
But this wait time in UI 2.0 is barely acceptable. It's shortened but nearly 40 seconds of "Saving."

Granted I had 97 or so mechs...but I'm only editing one.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tesunie, on 19 May 2014 - 07:44 AM, said:

As someone else just stated, it sounds like a resolution issue. Can you possibly change the resolution things render at? (Without degrading graphic game quality?)

It's a 60 inch TV. It's 1080 HD.

It's the only game I play that has this problem.

Tesunie, on 19 May 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

For the same reason some people like/hate/despise the current in game mechlab? Opinion. Preference. Comfort. Appeal.
(Just saying...)

It would be one thing if it was more like a 50/50 split. But it's more like a 90/10 split.

Almost every feedback post I've ever read on UI2.0 has mentioned making the mech building interface act more like Smurfy's, to the point that PGI actually listened (some what).

The 10% come accross as a very major outlier and I don't quite understand it.

Especially the clicking involved and scrolling through that terrible engine screen.

But to be honest, the most major issue with UI2.0, is the one we brought up in the first UI2.0 thread Bryan made, and the one that spawned the secondary thread.

The Social tools are TERRIBLE. They might as well not exist. And they are once against not a focal point in the UI, while instead relegated to a tiny flashing button.

It's a total failure on PGI's part.

[Roland]

Reitrix, on 19 May 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

its preference. I don't like having everything stuffed into my face. You should see how my HDDs are organized, lol. Some features from Smurfy would a great addition to what UI2.0 does, like one click armor maxing, But i also like the ability to focus in one specific location when building it up.

Could you clarify this point?

Personally, I see no situation where I ever just want to look at a single location of my mech...because constructing a mech involves moving equipment onto and off of different locations. It's a process of trying to fit things into one location, realizing that you may be short of space or tonnage, then pulling stuff out of other locations, or stripping armor, etc.

This is one of the chief deficiencies of MWO's interface. Since mech building is a holistic activity, involving the entire mech, having to click back and forth between different sections slows the process down. It makes it much more cumbersome to use.

I'm curious as to how you feel this separation benefits you in terms of usability, because your perspective here is certainly atypical. Note, I'm not suggesting that your perspective is wrong, but rather I'm interested in learning about what it is that makes you prefer this type of separation.

Quote

Doesn't change that it's easy to use once you figure it out. Which is also easy to do, as it kinda guides you every step of the way.

That's the thing though, it's really not easy to use for anyone, including expert users.

For a novice user, it's difficult because the functionality is hidden behind numerous sections of the interface which offer no hint that they are connected. There is no real directional flow through the interface.

For an expert user, it's still cumbersome, because even once you know where things are, you are still required to click through many separate sections of the interface to interact with the system. There is very little streamlining of this process, and it tends to require far too many clicks, and far too much distance moving across the screen to perform sequential actions.

In general, the usage of screen real-estate is poorly conceived. Large sections of the screen are dedicated to totally useless things (such as pictures of engines), while important information is displayed in very small text (like the actual qualities of those engines).

[Reitrix]

I honestly do not know for sure what causes the long save times. At a guess, It seems have to do with how much you modify before Checking out. For example, my Banshee when i was testing out different Ballistic configs, changing just the 4 ballistics led to a Save time of a couple of seconds. But redoing every scrap of that 'mech took significantly longer.

Also, in your first video, you're doing exactly what you do in UI2.0 .. selecting each Location and individually modifying it. The only difference is the tiny windowed UI and the placement of the "buttons" to access each section.
It amuses me that people want that UI back, without realizing that the functional difference between the two UI's in the 'Mech building aspect was purely visual.

Under the old UI, just going from Login to being able to select a 'Mech would take 3 minutes and 20 seconds, i timed it. Compared to the quick Connect i get on 2.0 followed by every 'mech immediately available in ordered Grid View ... And that scrolling bar on the bottom for my 'Mechs ... Ugh ...

UI2.0 does a lot of things RIGHT. There are things that need fixing, to be sure. Certain functions are missing, but these are the things that can be added in over time.
The 'Mech Detail button is very handy for an overview, some people want to be able to edit directly on that view, and i say let them. Have it as an option to do so, Maybe like a Minimal(what we see now) and Full (Basically what we see in the 'Mech Details, but editable) View Option? That way, those who like it how it is can keep doing what they're doing, and those that want it another way can have that too.
The list view for Equipment/Weapons will definitely improve things when they put it in.

Or maybe they need to let us make custom UI's with their assets
Come to think of it, given how the UI generates everything contextually rather than having everything load at once, The platform to allow that sort of modding is there.

[Tesunie]

I would like to invite people interested over to a suggestion thread I created on the "launch" button, with reasons why I feel there are problems with it, and possible solutions I have come up with for the issue.

However, after reading Nicholas's post, I guess I should make one soon about the social menus and why I feel there are problems with it and possible suggestions/solutions I can come up with (with possible pictures)... I think that is a larger issue at hand than the launch button. (I just latched onto my example here and expanded on it.)

I feel that, by trying to tackle and look at the UI as a whole, we are overlooking pieces of it, as well as causing a lot of unnecessary conflict. We are all arguing about the same issues, admitting they are a problem, but arguing about how much of a problem they really are.

Edit: Was an idiot and posted and forgot the link!!!

Edited by Tesunie, 19 May 2014 - 08:32 AM.

[Reitrix]

Roland, on 19 May 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Could you clarify this point?

Personally, I see no situation where I ever just want to look at a single location of my mech...because constructing a mech involves moving equipment onto and off of different locations. It's a process of trying to fit things into one location, realizing that you may be short of space or tonnage, then pulling stuff out of other locations, or stripping armor, etc.

This is one of the chief deficiencies of MWO's interface. Since mech building is a holistic activity, involving the entire mech, having to click back and forth between different sections slows the process down. It makes it much more cumbersome to use.

I'm curious as to how you feel this separation benefits you in terms of usability, because your perspective here is certainly atypical. Note, I'm not suggesting that your perspective is wrong, but rather I'm interested in learning about what it is that makes you prefer this type of separation.

I'm honestly not sure how to explain. I just spent a good 10 minutes trying to do just that, but kept deleting it.
I build to a purpose. When i build it, i already know where i want everything to be, so i just put it there. Like making my Stalker (4x PPC, 1x ML, 5x Streaks), i knew exactly what it needed to have on it, and where i wanted those things to be before i even pushed the configuration button.
On the rare occasions when i have no clear purpose for the Chassis (Like my DRG-5N with 2x AC/2, 2x ML and an LBX10), i tend to look at the component I'm working on and just browse through all the potential options until i find something i like for that section.
I probably am in a very small minority of people who build that way.
Not saying i couldn't do that with a view like the 'Mech Details window, only that i like being able to zoom in on one specific location and simply consider it without anything else to drag my focus away.

Which is why i advocate having both view modes available.

[Tesunie]

Reitrix, on 19 May 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

I'm honestly not sure how to explain. I just spent a good 10 minutes trying to do just that, but kept deleting it.
I build to a purpose. When i build it, i already know where i want everything to be, so i just put it there. Like making my Stalker (4x PPC, 1x ML, 5x Streaks), i knew exactly what it needed to have on it, and where i wanted those things to be before i even pushed the configuration button.
On the rare occasions when i have no clear purpose for the Chassis (Like my DRG-5N with 2x AC/2, 2x ML and an LBX10), i tend to look at the component I'm working on and just browse through all the potential options until i find something i like for that section.
I probably am in a very small minority of people who build that way.
Not saying i couldn't do that with a view like the 'Mech Details window, only that i like being able to zoom in on one specific location and simply consider it without anything else to drag my focus away.

Which is why i advocate having both view modes available.

This is actually how I tend to design most of my mechs... with some minor adjustments as I go along...
Probably why the current Mechlab doesn't bother me, though I still like smurfy's layout better.

[Amsro]

Karl Streiger, on 19 May 2014 - 05:36 AM, said:

No
its personal opinion
My opinion is that Smurfy did it wrong and MWO did it wrong -
i want to have the Heavy Metal loadout with tabs for

• engine and structure and number of heatsinks
  
• armor (type and distribution)
  
• weapon lists and to choose them
  
• distribute the equipment and "structure" slots on my own

So and you that don't like UI2.0 and say smurfy is better - don't have any idea how a mech lab has to look like.


Its obvious that its my and only my personal opinion. All you do in this and other topics is to tell us your personal opinion.
But please tell me why is your personal opinion is better as mine?

I've never claimed smurphys to be the best. But it is leaps and bounds better then UI2.0 mechlab.

I'll agree that simplicity and ease of use are essential to a good mechlab.

Your ideas may lead to a better one, but PGI isn't about to listen to ANY of the posts here or on their official feedback. That was painfully obvious after the second Public Test Server UI2.0 was IDENTICAL to the first Public Test after a few more months work.

None of the feedback was even looked at.

[Targaryen X]

I am one of those who simply despises the new UI. I do not feel 'terrible' is too strong a word. And I too know people who quit playing due to the new interface, they simply could not be bothered with what they perceived to be incomprehensible design decisions and the resulting convoluted interface. So for them, yes, the new UI is gamebreaking.
I use it because its what we have, but thats all I can say for it. Its the tool we have available, if we want to play we have to figure out its quirks.
Like, say, when refitting a mech, and hmmm maybe Ill sell off a few of these engines <looks around mechlab for a way to do this for wayyyyy too long> .... somehow?
Oh right, no kidding, why didnt I think of that -- by backing out of the mechlab and heading to the inventory screen, selling from there, then going back to the mechlab.... how obvious, how intuitive, this is a feature so mindblowingly awesome I simply cannot fathom why didnt they do this in the original UI? Being able to sell gear right from within the mechlab is so... 2013. :/
Unintuitive is not just a buzzword, it is a legitimate complaint.
Being able to use the new UI does not make one a genius, but being happy about it... how much lower can one set the bar?
I am also baffled by the complaints about the smurphy interface but whatever, some people dont like oral sex, but that's just more for the rest of us, amiright!?!?!

[Tesunie]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

The Social tools are TERRIBLE. They might as well not exist. And they are once against not a focal point in the UI, while instead relegated to a tiny flashing button.

I have created a new thread to discuss the Social part of the interface...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tesunie, on 19 May 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

I have created a new thread to discuss the Social part of the interface...

http://mwomercs.com/...ssion-feedback/

First post after Bryan's.

No offense to you, but they don't care.

[Dymlos2003]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 May 2014 - 10:52 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ssion-feedback/

First post after Bryan's.

No offense to you, but they don't care.

It's not that they don't care, it's that they don't have the time to focus on it. They have mentioned this many a time. People want a smurfys much more than the social tools so we'll probably get that first.



This is the flow of the mechlab. Pretty simple right? Not to some people.

[Darklord]

Chemie, on 19 May 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:

beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep

You forgot to put in the crash to desktop as you go to your mech beep and configure beep.

Edited by Darklord, 19 May 2014 - 12:05 PM.