| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1585
   |
Posted - 2015.02.27 08:36:53 -
[1] - Quote
And yet again CCP surprises us with a redundant unneeded not asked for add on/change.
It's all been said by the why/unneeded/it works now fine camp so I have nothing to add but that I'm happy that those who designed this have zero sight problems.
Seriously 1 pixel differences between icons that ALL look the same?
Oh well you cramm it down our throats anyway, what's the point in asking to redesign/reconsider this?
|
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1587
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 20:30:13 -
[2] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Well, I just read the devblog and I can't tell the smaller icons from each other, woo-hoo!  I'm waiting to see them at Sisi, but so far I fear the worst. [GǪ] Currently I can tell the thickness of the crosses, even if the crosses themselves are fuzzy. But shape recognition is not exactly my strong point. Just doing some testing of ideas, but, with your bad eyes, how distinguishable are these different icons? Are the gaps distinct enough? Can the difference in shape be seen? Are the tiny protrusions too tiny?
Yeah that looks like a lot into the right direction. Just don't get your hopes up you/me/we will be listened too a this dev was in large part responsible for the reworked unified inventory debacle (in its 1st iteration). And we all know how much extra work it took them to get that slightly on par to what there was before.
To be honest I think this is set in stone like the unified inventory, no matter how much data we bring up, its a done deal.
Wish I was wrong. |
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1587
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 12:49:13 -
[3] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:So I wonder, do we really need to know that a destroyer is a destroyer and not a frigate? Or that a battlecruiser is not a cruiser? From the point of view of "it's red, shoot it" there's no difference. We don't have "destroyer size" weapons, and actually whatever hits a frigate is likely to hit harder on a dessie. So why bother telling them apart?
According to CCP we do.
CCP is currently thinking we don't get enough information with the tools we have at our disposal. Therefor CCP is in a 'we must overload our player base with information THAT'S ALREADY THERE!' mode (tooltips come to mind).
In this case there is already a TYPE! column in the overview, so there is no need whatsoever to add that information there twice by cramming that information in a 18 x 18 pixel box with icons that look more or less the same.
|
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1592
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 10:22:39 -
[4] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Monday morning, guess the devs will start reading again.
So, to summarize:
- icons are too small
- there are too many icon types
- icons are too similar to each other
- moving icons are blurry
- the relevant information (ship type) is on the overview, not on the icons
Did I miss something?
That sums it up pretty much. :)
If we only could convince CCP to stop adding redundant information into the UI (information that is already there) we players & CCP could come a long way in cleaning up this proposed visual mess.
If they could skip on the this 18x18 icon must show it's " specific this or specific that" and go back to a more global recognition icon interface like we have now, it.. I mean a few years ago I was on SiSi and there where new icons for cruisers/frigs/battleships etc. in the form of tiny stars (if I remember correctly). 1 star = frig, 2 stars = cruiser etc. And I was then thinking this is so much clearer then the crosses we have now. Sadly it never made it to TQ.
|
| |
|