interface proposal

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
EvilGuru
Regular
Regular
Posts: 615
Joined: 23 Jun 2007, 22:41

Re: interface proposal

Post by EvilGuru » 10 Oct 2008, 21:29

Zarel wrote:
elio wrote: this helps nobody, please do constructive critiscism
"Something closer to what's currently being used" is constructive enough.
It is hard to get much closer without it becoming the current interface itself. Very little has changed — reticule on the left — mini-map on the right — structures down the middle and the power bar below. Not that much different functionality wise.

"If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got." A slightly different version of the current interface is probably not worth the effort. We need to think radically here — of the wall suggestions/proposals — with the possibility of finding something we all/the majority likes.

What we currently have works — what we need to discuss is how to devise something which works better. This can only occur if people point out specifics about what they do not like with the current GUI or Elio's proposal. At this stage of the game (prototyping) general comments are not sufficient to entail real change.

Regards, Freddie.

fisk0
Trained
Trained
Posts: 245
Joined: 17 Aug 2008, 16:59
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: interface proposal

Post by fisk0 » 10 Oct 2008, 23:23

Yeah, I really think elio's GUI proposal is pretty close to the current GUI, but improves on all areas of it. Most of the basics are the same, but he has added the functions many take for granted in modern RTS games nowadays, the basic visual style off the original Warzone 2100 GUI is still there.
I'd love to see how the Design screen looks and fits in elio's version though.
Desktop: AMD Athlon X3 440 3.0ghz, 4GB RAM, Radeon HD4200, Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Laptop: AMD Athlon X2 QL-64 2.1Ghz, 3GB RAM, Radeon HD3200, Windows Vista Home Basic 32-bit & Ubuntu 9.04 64-bit

User avatar
whippersnapper
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1183
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 15:46

Re: interface proposal

Post by whippersnapper » 11 Oct 2008, 01:12

A slightly different version of the current interface is probably not worth the effort. We need to think radically here — of the wall suggestions/proposals — with the possibility of finding something we all/the majority likes.

What we currently have works — what we need to discuss is how to devise something which works better. This can only occur if people point out specifics about what they do not like with the current GUI or Elio's proposal. At this stage of the game (prototyping) general comments are not sufficient to entail real change.
2 other areas that will be key, imho, to developing game play will be widgets and new GUI to the end of better
control over combat groups, in a coordinated way, on the way to and during heat of battle engagements. this
has been an Achilles heel for wz (along with balance) since its release imho, which is why i believe its real
greatness is yet to come (though it has had the promise of greatness from the beginning).
see if i can be more specific and also keep it KISS. what follows would be an elementary step that could lead
to greater sophistication down the road.


it's very basic military control which is absent in wz and cannot exist without new widget sys and ui. maneuver is the single word but let me expand as coordinated, commander led combat groups so that you can create offenses from different directions and simultaneously if you so will it.... perhaps in more than one theater of operations if you are an effective enough multi-tasker under the pressure of imminent conflict, here and there.

KISS this way: as soon as you create a commander led combat group an icon appears on the left of the screen. left double clicking on the icon will give you it's composition and state. single left click will take you to the combat group and in control.

next: double left click on mini-map and it becomes a macro-map transparency that uses whatever screen space not occupied by the other ui widgets. on this macro-map there would be clear indicators of the known world inc terrain detail, your commander led combat groups, the enemy, etc.

next: all your combat groups clearly identified on the macro-map, right click drag on each to maneuver into whatever tactical deployments your grand strategy calls for. double left click on the macro-map to collapse back to the mini-map.

next: now you can cycle through your deployed combat groups by their icons as you will no matter where they are in relation to each other - your immediately hands on in the field, on the water or in the air (non-commander led VTOL group at this stage).

i would guess peeps could handle at least 3 combat groups simultaneously with this method (with practice more). i'll leave the rest of the possibilities to your imagination on how this would radically expand game play from its present linear, single dimensional, scope.

i'm sure there are many more and different ideas out there related to new functional expansion of the gui to facilitate development of new and interesting game play.

elio
Regular
Regular
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: interface proposal

Post by elio » 11 Oct 2008, 14:31

KISS this way: as soon as you create a commander led combat group an icon appears on the left of the screen. left double clicking on the icon will give you it's composition and state. single left click will take you to the combat group and in control.
i think you can access your commanders by clicking on the star icon or press alt-1 alt-2 .. alt-n
next: all your combat groups clearly identified on the macro-map, right click drag on each to maneuver into whatever tactical deployments your grand strategy calls for. double left click on the macro-map to collapse back to the mini-map.
you mean order a movement by clicking on the map (mini map is able to do that too)

i think you're ideas are rudimentally already implemented, we only have to place them more ergonomic

update, hope you like it

idea:
menu with tank will replace main menu when unit is selected
we need a solution to switch fastly between main and object menu, as you don't want to deselect every time you want to start a new research
Attachments
game interface.png

doom3r
Regular
Regular
Posts: 502
Joined: 29 Aug 2007, 15:04

Re: interface proposal

Post by doom3r » 11 Oct 2008, 15:12

That unit menu is pretty cool - although I preferred a more square-shaped menu selector (the low-left corner part of the hud), like the original or the first you designed.
Oh and unit menu should be scrolling too!

User avatar
whippersnapper
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1183
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 15:46

Re: interface proposal

Post by whippersnapper » 11 Oct 2008, 15:42

i think you're ideas are rudimentally already implemented, we only have to place them more ergonomic
exactly. that is why it is KISS. ergonomics is the keyword that makes a difference between a very useful
integration and one so discrete as to be not so useful (and even carpal tunnel syndrome inducing, thus not really as potent in RL performance.) it is exactly about taking to the next level (what EG suggested) what is now rudimentary to a much more useful integration by way of an elegant UI expansion. in this sense it follows an exponential curve in ease of manipulation-power rather than a non-integrated incremental advance for the end user. at the same time, still remains KISS on the implementation side, and that is the ideal design tandem. in all project assemblies it's called the biggest bang for each buck of investment (ROI).

elio
Regular
Regular
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: interface proposal

Post by elio » 11 Oct 2008, 15:58

exactly. that is why it is KISS. ergonomics is the keyword that makes a difference between a very useful
integration and one so discrete as to be not so useful (and even carpal tunnel syndrome inducing, thus not really as potent in RL performance.) it is exactly about taking to the next level (what EG suggested) what is now rudimentary to a much more useful integration by way of an elegant UI expansion. in this sense it follows an exponential curve in ease of manipulation-power rather than a non-integrated incremental advance for the end user. at the same time, still remains KISS on the implementation side, and that is the ideal design tandem. in all project assemblies it's called the biggest bang for each buck of investment (ROI).
aha
That unit menu is pretty cool - although I preferred a more square-shaped menu selector
i think it gives a dynamic/modular touch, it only outlines the buttons
imo the original has a rectangle because the old widget code isn't able to handle more interesting window shapes

i'll reshape the mini-map a bit too

ah, and i've another idea, what do you think of the ability to drag'n'drop buttons from download/file.php?id=2415&mode=view (watch left top) to one of the three button-slots below?

@EvilGuru: does the current widget code even support drag'n'drop already?

EvilGuru
Regular
Regular
Posts: 615
Joined: 23 Jun 2007, 22:41

Re: interface proposal

Post by EvilGuru » 11 Oct 2008, 16:03

We've got drag support, so things such as sliders are possible and window resize handles. Will need to look into drop support — possible, but will require somewhat more work.

Regards, Freddie.

elio
Regular
Regular
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: interface proposal

Post by elio » 11 Oct 2008, 16:06

or a workaround, by clicking right click on the unit menu icon, the unit settings window appear, when you click on a button it'll replace in unit menu

EvilGuru
Regular
Regular
Posts: 615
Joined: 23 Jun 2007, 22:41

Re: interface proposal

Post by EvilGuru » 11 Oct 2008, 16:16

elio wrote:or a workaround, by clicking right click on the unit menu icon, the unit settings window appear, when you click on a button it'll replace in unit menu
If we have a use for it then I am happy to implement it, or at least look into it. Just need a few hours to think it through with some of the other devs. The implementation will probably not be that hard.

Regards, Freddie.

User avatar
ClockWork
Trained
Trained
Posts: 217
Joined: 07 Sep 2008, 03:22
Location: USA

Re: interface proposal

Post by ClockWork » 13 Oct 2008, 08:01

Woh, when I saw this, my jaw detached itself like a snake.

Though, some of you may say, “don’t fix what isn’t broken,” I just want to toss a couple ideas for this. After all, I don’t think there are any wrong ideas until it has been discussed.

What if the menu with design, build, research, etc, were all in a straight line, horizontally, in the bottom of the screen. Instead of them being in the hexagon shape, they would be rectangular buttons, so they would fit snugly in the screens area. Then you could have the power bar, vertically, sitting by the map. That would make the power bar smaller though, but still, it reduces the clutter on screen I think.

Oh, and Wai! Elio is so great! Wai Wai! :D

elio
Regular
Regular
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: interface proposal

Post by elio » 13 Oct 2008, 18:00

hehe
hopefully you don't have to go to hospital when you see the update xD

damn time consuming thing, worked the whole day at this here
Attachments
game interface.png

fisk0
Trained
Trained
Posts: 245
Joined: 17 Aug 2008, 16:59
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: interface proposal

Post by fisk0 » 13 Oct 2008, 18:21

elio wrote:hehe
hopefully you don't have to go to hospital when you see the update xD

damn time consuming thing, worked the whole day at this here
Wow, I like that one a lot, but shouldn't there be a button or other easy to understand way to switch between the commander interface and the standard interface?
Some of those buttons aren't very obvious what they mean either, what does the statistics chart in the rightmost 3rd row mean, and what are the differences between the standard crosshair and the one seen from perspective in the second row?
Desktop: AMD Athlon X3 440 3.0ghz, 4GB RAM, Radeon HD4200, Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Laptop: AMD Athlon X2 QL-64 2.1Ghz, 3GB RAM, Radeon HD3200, Windows Vista Home Basic 32-bit & Ubuntu 9.04 64-bit

User avatar
whippersnapper
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1183
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 15:46

Re: interface proposal

Post by whippersnapper » 13 Oct 2008, 19:09

elio i can barely express the joy, promise and power your work is eliciting within my
total engagement with wz. in tandem with zarel's re-balancing, this work your doing will have
the greatest impact on fundamentally advancing overall wz game play, imho, than anything
else done to date.

as fisk, i have detail questions but i'm sure you will clarify in due course.

elio
Regular
Regular
Posts: 508
Joined: 09 Jun 2007, 22:11

Re: interface proposal

Post by elio » 13 Oct 2008, 19:12

whippersnapper wrote:elio i can barely express the joy, promise and power your work is eliciting within my
total engagement with wz. in tandem with zarel's re-balancing, this work your doing will have
the greatest impact on fundamentally advancing overall wz game play, imho, than anything
else done to date.

as fisk, i have detail questions but i'm sure you will clarify in due course.
thank you very much
but imho the devs have much harder and nasty work than me, they have to dig through tons of spaghetti code but i can work from ground up. don't forget the hard work behind the surface

i'll post an explanation soon

Post Reply