Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 33 post(s) |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2087
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 20:54:53 -
[91] - Quote
The new icons are great. You can tell ship classes apart at a glance without worrying about relative size because of the different shapes. Also, the shapes become more complex as you move up classes. Of course, destroyers look like wrecks but this isn't a major flaw because that's just taking a shortcut to the inevitable for me.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
motie one
Secret Passage
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 20:58:22 -
[92] - Quote
You really need to stop using size as a ship differentiator. Below cruiser is just too small. Stretch them the full height of the icon "box" at the least. Better still use the full icon space with a destinctive design. Little triangles are just a poor choice, and even poorer visibility.
Here is a good test, assuming you have good eyesight, put your eyes 3 inches away from the icon and try to tell them apart, you should be able to even blurred. If not, redraw as I suggest and try again. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1033
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 21:07:00 -
[93] - Quote
i'm playing eve in a regular 1900*1100 window, and I'm playing at 90% UI scaling. The current iteration of overview icons is very not suited for 90%.
100% scaling 90% scaling
The differences are enormous, to the point where spotting ships compared to conatiners or even drones becomes difficult. 90% scaling - There are around 10 ships.
Finding ships without disabling drones is quite hard. There are 6 in this picture: 90% It's a lot easier on 100% scaling. |
Kraizer793
Absurdity of Abstractions
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 21:07:12 -
[94] - Quote
The latest iteration of icons look much better on the whole, namely structures. A few points of criticism, if I may:
1. NPC icons are a bit more difficult to differentiate from player ships. Hostile ones aren't an issue due to their color difference. Neutral and friendly ones, however, are a bit more difficult. A few ideas:
1. Color them. I don't think using blue, green, or yellow would be a god move due to conflicts with friendlies, corpmates, and other yellow objects (Cans, wrecks, next waypoint highlight). Perhaps adding am extremely faint tint to the icons in a cyan-ish color would be acceptable, but it may not be enough to differentiate when a handfull of icons begin to overlap and intersect.
2. Make them dimmer. If the lines of the friendly/neutral NPC icons were made to be less bright, and approaching a bit of a gray tone, it may be easier to identify. They'd be easily distinguished from player ships, and player ships would show up "over the top" of NPC icons when there are a lot of players and friendly/neutral NPCs in one spot on screen.
Once I have a chance to hop on SiSi again to look at these whenever they're put out for viewing in an in-game environment, I'l likely have more input. |
Hegh Batlh
Stille Gewalt Dead Terrorists
22
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 21:52:08 -
[95] - Quote
Is it possible to seperate cyno and becons??? Would be perfect when cynos have their own symbol. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1751
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 23:06:43 -
[96] - Quote
Alright so, its better when you have the whole picture! I'm sold on most of the stuff. Of course, there still are things that could be improved in my opinion:
- The non-looted wreck icon looks like a "contact" icon. I see a person's head and its torso. I do understand the logic behind it though, and its actually clever!
- The ice field icon looks bad in my opinion, you should try something else to differenciate it from the asteroid belt.
- The carrier and supercarrier icon (especially carrier) looks bad. Same for dreadnought, you should consider something like this. With the two turrets on the side, its very intuitive. Even if they are tiny once 32x32.
- The whole industrial ships line are... really meh.
- The destroyer icon looks too much like an old wreck icon, but I guess you cannot make design decisions based on that kind of previous stuff you're trying to get rid of.
- Why make a SBU icon? It is going to go away in two months anyway.
- I'm assuming the "beacon" works for both cynos and beacons? If yes, you should consider splitting it and using the "agent in space" icon for cynosural fields, instead. Find something else for the agent in space, their current icon just screams cyno :D
- I would honestly find something else entierly for NPCs. The distinction between players ships and friendly NPC ships is blurred, and even for ennemy NPC ships it doesn't seem very ergonomic to have the same shape. But that's just my opinion, red crosses are fine! Pretty sure you could make 7 different red crosses, which would cover: Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Battleships, Capitals, Non-combat (indus & co)
I would personally go for multiple variations of red crosses with various sizes and thicknesses, plus multiple geometric shapes made of lines that do not touch for the rest (non combat stuff and caps / supers). For NPCs.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Soleil Fournier
Ultimatum. The Bastion
42
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 23:10:15 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Surge wrote: There are some aesthetic criticisms floating about. I won't shy away from that. The take on this particular set of icons was much more Military and Utilitarian themed; thus trying to stick with a lot of simple lines and shapes that would be easy to identify at a glance. However the old icons were even simpler in many ways, and I'm open to discussing what you guys found aesthetically pleasing about them.
Comparing the old to the new, aestheticly, I still prefer the old. It's not the shapes or anything, I'm fine with new shapes. But the icon quality seems to have taken a few steps down. Old ones seem to pop more, feel more solid if you will. New ones seem flatter.
Also not a fan of the gray fill. Could do without that. |
Jon Dekker
Dekker Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 23:29:25 -
[98] - Quote
I will be blunt and honest here. I don't like the "pixel font" direction these are taking. I assumed new icons would be done from the same approach as the UI revamp, as vectors. These look ok, but pixel fonts aren't in style anymore. They stopped being in style 10 years ago.
I would like to see this system move to a more advanced HUD that combines and groups bracket clusters into a more readable layout. I'm all for the icon redesign, and anything is better than what currently exists, but it just feels like a missed opportunity to me. |
Castelo Selva
Forcas armadas DARKNESS.
73
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 23:39:09 -
[99] - Quote
Thank you for the whole picture. I am very happy with this new iteration, however, I would like to say some personal views.
1 GÇô As some of people already point, would it be nice to have a different icon for cynosural fields. 2 GÇô It would be nice to have an option to scale up the icons / overview. As already stated there are people who play the game in HD displays, and it became difficult to read / identify the icons. 3 GÇô It is my personal opinion, but I like the old pod / capsule icon. I know the reason for the new shape, but since the pod has no combat capability I think the old one would be better.
Again, thank you for all your efforts to make the game better. Please, do not drop this project!
Castelo |
Oktura Ostus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 23:45:14 -
[100] - Quote
Dreadnought is too similar to cruiser, imho. It looks like subcapital ship.
|
|
Oktura Ostus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 00:53:37 -
[101] - Quote
Imho, the idea to draw NPC things with filled background and player's things as wireframe is pretty strange.
There is 'background' tab in overview settings where player can turn on any background for any ship or drone. For example, it's very handy to have white background for neutrals in overview, but this makes icons on the grid to be very similar to white NPC.
Secondly, now we have got halo around icons, when background is turned on for them. As I understand it's drawn to solve problem above (halo fill => standing, normall fill => NPC), but, imho, it does not help, they are still similar. Instead of helping, it causes another disadvantage, it impacts readability of the grid. For examples: big group of drones few drones As you can see even small group of drones already makes opaque spot that can hide something important. Medium set of drones can hide small gang. On Tranquility for instance, only large set of drones can hide something, because halo is much smaller.
Imho, the second problem is important one, it will impact our gameplay until it's fixed, since it's not a question of learning, or remembering icons, or graphic settings. I just can't see anything behind of cluster of 5 drones or ships.
To fix the problem it would be very helpful to remove halo from icons and use only internal filling to indicate standing, criminal state, fleet members, and other things from tab 'background'. For example, criminal (red background) could look like current red NPC. It's very compact icon, since no halo, and even big group of such icons won't make opaque spot.
Then it would be good to leave crosses or improved version of crosses for NPC ships. It gives much better visible difference then opaque/wireframed icons and won't conflict with standing backgrounds. I don't think there is big necessity to see is that custom office or container belongs to NPC or not, so only NPC ships (may be wrecks) needs own set of icons.
After this background can be used for non-ships things to reduce number of different icons or give better difference. For example: full/empty wreck, cyno/beacon, normal/ice asteroids, planet/sun and etc ... |
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
128
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 02:09:32 -
[102] - Quote
CCP Surge wrote: - A blurrier distinction between NPC and player ship icons: The NPCs have a light fill and I agree that the old crosses were dead simple to distinguish from players, although they had less info to convey. I'm just curious which parts of gameplay do you guys find the lack of being able to tell players and NPCs apart from one another quick most noticeable? I'm just looking for more reasons to make the distinction more clear.
Imho, we don't need the current level of information about the NPC's. A slight variation of the old crosses is what i think would end up working best to differentiate the NPC classes AND make them different from player ships. Why is this not even an option?
If i may suggest, we really don't need a different icon for carriers/dreads. Again, reiterating that cruisers and dreads look waay too similar.
And again, We used to have a single drone icon, it functioned well, without cluttering everything and getting very confusing. 8 is still too many in my mind.
Also, we've been saying, we don't need a fully separate icon for only the venture/prospect. They are frigates, as are rookie ships. Anyone who needs to know more information than "frigate" will know exactly what it is and what it is capable of when they see the various places in the overview that list that very specific information. "Type" column comes to mind.
I'm tired, and i know i'm forgetting some stuff. Recap, much much better than the last attempt, but still needs refinement before it is ready for TQ. |
Warden Zorch
Caldari State Navy Operations Heiian Conglomerate
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 03:44:52 -
[103] - Quote
Will you also directly design the brackets for the upcoming Citadel Structures, or will they have to live with a kind of workaround after they get published? @CCP Surge
My german blog:-áhttp://wardenzorch.blogspot.de/
|
Lars Erlkonig
Discrete Solutions Ltd.
16
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 03:45:25 -
[104] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Finding ships without disabling drones is quite hard. There are 6 in this picture: 90%
Having tried the new Icons on SISI, I also thought this was the case. Currently it is easy to tell apart ships from drones, but with the new icons, it is very difficult to tell at a glance what targets are in space that I want to shoot at. Could we use a color to differentiate between the two or have the option to use a larger icon for ships and smaller icon for drones when they are visualized in space and not on the overview?
Additionally with the new icons, depending on how much zoom in/out one uses, they obscure a lot of the ship graphics CCP has worked hard to improve on. When trying to look at a gang to see if it is all shiny amarr ships or rusty minmatar hulls, these icons tend to obscure a lot of that detail without zooming in closer. The old icons weren't good at showing relative sizes, but they were good at letting you see the ships. |
Maruk Ihnati
United Warriors
40
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 05:48:44 -
[105] - Quote
As a player that needs less complexity to get a quick understanding on what is on grid when you don't have prior information, all these new icons will make the job even harder and more disorienting.
Also, the icons on sisi look like a 3 year old drew them.
|
Crimson Grimslow
Total Recoil. Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 06:17:06 -
[106] - Quote
I dot like em. They add unnecessary clutter. I can no longer tell a station from a bs at first glance. And in a battle being able to tell where everything is at a moments notice is a crucial thing. |
AngelFood
22
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 06:44:18 -
[107] - Quote
If it ain't broke don't fix it, is an old old saying which is very very true.
Please do not change the icons for everything into these weak new shape ideas. They are fine as they are all of them.
which crazy people think this is good? why are people not saying no?
just terrible terrible terrible terrible, change all back including dmg cntrl please.
I'm sorry but ccp has lost collective sanity if they let this test patch go through. |
William Rokov
The Dozen Galaxy Spiritus
70
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 07:43:34 -
[108] - Quote
Hello gyus, icons for shiptypes are great and obvious. Its really nice to see intuitive icons for them - I understood every shiptype, even without checking descritption.
But what about drones? I see there are some intuitive principle - pointy icons means dangerous ship, like frigates, cruisers, battleships, etc. Ships with flat face - peaceful ships, like industrials, mining barges, etc. Combat drones, sentrys, logistics - okay, they fit into the concept. But mining drones, fighters and fighter bombers are not fit into concept - flat face fighters and pointy minning drones are not intuitive understandable.
Would be great if u will change them for more obvious icons.
No links, no imps, no scouts. True solo pvp pilot. Channel for russian users: PVP.solo
|
Strata Maslav
Chapter Nine Not A Dot
124
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 09:58:58 -
[109] - Quote
I'd have to agree the dreadnaught is too similar to the cruiser.
My suggestion is to give the Dreadnaught the current Titan icon (which appears to be two battleship chevrons stacked so it makes sense to give it to the dreadnaught), and make the titan's icon a 5 pointed star shape (like a military General which seem appropriate as its the largest combat ship) |
Circumstantial Evidence
178
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 15:29:24 -
[110] - Quote
When looking at Dred and Cruiser/BC icons, and thinking about the similarities people note - I wonder if we may be 'reading' the icons starting from the top, down to the bottom. The top of the shape is the same. The height is similar (I didn't count pixels.) Dred icon has a tiny v-shape extension at the bottom.
Consider moving that element up to the top: a v-shaped detent (two peaks) would, I think, be recognizably different at a quick glance. It would break the consistency of all combat icons having a single peak, all the XL ones might need a similar treatment (I don't think it would look too good if done to the Titan icon.)
Or just put a dot in the middle :) |
|
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:38:07 -
[111] - Quote
Please don't change the station and stargate icons, they are perfect right now. IMO, this two redesign icons are terrible compared to the others; that is not even a perfect circle for the stargate icons, and i see no point to use grey square for the station icon. |
Sol Maxis
Genesis Holding
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 21:35:46 -
[112] - Quote
I understand you wanting to make changes to the icons, but I really wish they could just be left well alone. Current icons work very, very well. They are VERY easy to learn for new players and they don't give you a headache / eyestrain trying to distinguish between them.
Would it be at all possible to give people a choice between 'Classic' and 'Current' icons? Seriously, I'm struggling with these. My eyes aren't what they once were and extended periods of play are actually taking a toll.
Really sorry, but I gotta give a thumbs down. |
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
455
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 21:42:28 -
[113] - Quote
Give NPC icons a different color, red for hostile and blue for neutral. Right now they are too hard to differentiate from players.
I am a pod pilot:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
|
L'erwonees D'arthiva
Nope.Inc
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.16 12:09:02 -
[114] - Quote
new icons for entities, ships and drones sound like a pain Awsome, now i'll need a magnifying glass on my screen, and the chart right next to it to know what i'm looking at. and by the time i found out i'll either be dead or the intell wil be outdated...
implementing too much meaning into the icon itself and having one icon for each thing will only make things more complex. -on top of that some of the things that would gain having particular icons are sharing design with radically different items. -vice versa, some designs should be shared because they serve the same purpose but dont even remotely look alike. -some designs do not look like what they should do or doesnt give a clue, but instead mimic old designs (and these do clue you on their function). -some icons "meanings" are heavyly misleading -why not keep the chevrons for fleet and star for corp ? who knows...
if we "accept" the -one icon per thing- why is a wreck changing icon? cant it just look like the npc that generated it preserving size, purpose and looks but slightly alterating the icon, thus making it clear it's a "ship class npc wreck" thus emphasing where it came from, giving the player information of what's happening (happend recently)?
but. it's still a better icon story than the previous icon soup you proposed. I'll be fine as long as you dont put these in game. And again, why work on starbases if you are going for the space ch+óteaux (citadels). thx for reading, in the hope the devs. will not ignore my contribution ~~0
|
L'erwonees D'arthiva
Nope.Inc
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.16 12:21:08 -
[115] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:When looking at Dred and Cruiser/BC icons, and thinking about the similarities people note - I wonder if we may be 'reading' the icons starting from the top, down to the bottom. The top of the shape is the same. The height is similar (I didn't count pixels.) Dred icon has a tiny v-shape extension at the bottom. [...]Or just put a dot in the middle :) Now i know what this icons replacement reminds me of !!!! learning japanese kanjis stroke orders and counts, along with meaning and combination of the radicals!
in before we end up with these on the overview : - T¼¦ can you see all the 29 strokes? - tæá how about these 14 ?
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
231
|
Posted - 2015.05.16 14:02:29 -
[116] - Quote
L'erwonees D'arthiva wrote:Now i know what this icons replacement reminds me of !!!! learning japanese kanjis stroke orders and counts, along with meaning and combination of the radicals!
The hard part's the readings, your complaint sounds like you didn't get far in your Japanese studies :P |
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
944
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 05:44:14 -
[117] - Quote
So why are player entities (which are occupied by a person) the empty ones, while the NPCs are filled?
Seems backwards |
Freya25
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 16:24:56 -
[118] - Quote
Make it simple or Riot,get it? Nah you don't get it |
Lyta Jhonson
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
68
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 21:37:03 -
[119] - Quote
I agree with people saying about barely different dreadnought and cruiser icons. Also, I think that cruiser and battleship should be switched around as proposed battleship look more speedy while cruiser icon appears more bulky to me. And titan icon... it just breaks all of the logic: it looks fast and lightweight, it does not follow diamond shape rest of capitals have and it does not have underscore which one would expect it to have according to size pattern frigate->destroyer, cruiser->battlecruiser, dreadnought->titan.
So, what about this: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1505/NoUTVmZ3.png ? |
Castelo Selva
Forcas armadas DARKNESS.
74
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 21:42:04 -
[120] - Quote
You are good. Nice one!
+1 for that propose. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |