next »

[Jordgubben]

I recently rewrote the entire GUI for my text based non-combat RPG 'Project NOM' (Working title). The old gui architecture had more or or less painted it self into a wall and it was not practically feasible to do a lot of the most trivial special cases I need. The new GUI has a mulit-mode system that allows every "page" of interaction to be handled in it's own unique way. This unlocks a whole lot of new options that should benefit future releases.

But when I rewrote the code I also changed the UX layout quite a bit. And although the code is more workable, I'm not quite sure if I improved or worsened the UX. So this is where I need your aid, my noble peers.

Instructionados
Please play the game in both versions. You don't have to play very long, but if you could get through at least one whole dispute (this games equivalent of a battle), by either winning or loosing, then that would be great. THis should take you a total of less than 10 minutes.

NEW GUI

OLD GUI

Questionados

• What improved in the new one?
• What felt better in old one?
• What works well in both or neither?

General feedback on the game is of course also appreciated (except perhapes for the story aspects, which are intentionally just a place holder made of straw and dry spit). But I'm mainly looking for UX and general layouting feedback.

Also, finally, if you put your forum handle in the optional 'Player name' box then I can match your feedback to what you actually did in game and that can sometimes help out tremendously.

K, thx, bi.
 

[AaronB]

Quickly played both versions.  The layout for both is confusing, however if I had to choose I would go for the NEW GUI.

[Jordgubben]

Thank you for trying it out.

Is is the exploring parts (mostly green buttons) or the dispute part (mostly yellow buttons) that is most confusing?
I'm currently working on making a specific GUI-mode for the disputes part.

[AaronB]

I feel the call to action should remain in the upper panel and be explicit.

For example in 'Small harbor pier' have in the upper panel the options

 - Continue to loading docks
 - talk to Bernd

Then show the conversation options in the lower panel when I select 'talk to'.

[michaelplzno]

Neither of them worked on my iphone.

[valrus]

I'm not sure which is better; I think the new one has more potential for growth, though.

I agree with AaronB about the actions.  Both the old and the new interfaces had actions divided into different panels that (from the user point of view) seemed arbitrary.  (Like sometimes I "go" using the hyperlinks, and other times it's a button.  Talking to Bernd is a hyperlink, but there's also a "talk to the sailor" button.)  I think this may be because you have them implemented differently and this division makes sense within the code, but from the user experience point of view the division seems arbitrary.

For navigating around the world, I'd put NSEW directions on go directions and maybe give the player an automap.  I could never get a handle on which "go" directions were leading me back to places I'd already been or when I was traveling in circles (and I had played the original for a decent amount of time).  I was never 100% which action choices were "go" commands in the first place, actually.

[Jordgubben]

I feel the call to action should remain in the upper panel and be explicit.

For example in 'Small harbor pier' have in the upper panel the options

 - Continue to loading docks
 - talk to Bernd

Then show the conversation options in the lower panel when I select 'talk to'.

So your saying it should go Verb first ("Talk.." -> "..to Bernd about Stuff"), not target first ("Bernd" -> "Talk about stuff")?

I'm not sure which is better; I think the new one has more potential for growth, though.

...

For navigating around the world, I'd put NSEW directions on go directions and maybe give the player an automap.  I could never get a handle on which "go" directions were leading me back to places I'd already been or when I was traveling in circles (and I had played the original for a decent amount of time).  I was never 100% which action choices were "go" commands in the first place, actually.

Navigation is still quite a mess. It definitely needs more attention.

I've been hesitant about NSEW because this is not how most of us navigate in our daily life. Some indigenous people actually think in NSWE, but most of us use left and right. But left and right will also be problematic when I start adding room illustrations, as it will be hard for the player to tell if "right" and "left" are relative to the view direction or the movement direction.

But perhaps I could express NSWE in a more subtle way. Not really mention the words "north" and "south", but still maintain some sort of direction indicator. And a mini-map would be great.

[Jordgubben]

I've made a lot of changes to improve navigation.

• The initial harbour area has been restructured (mostly simplified) and a few rooms now have illustrations.
• There are now NSWE indicators and a map (although it does not work for all rooms yet).
• The action-buttons and target-links have been moved closer together (since they serve similar purposes)

Although the UX is far from "perfect", I think the changes are big enough to ask for more feedback before applying further improvements.
 
Please try it out and tell me what you think.




(The game has a lot of analytic hooks. So playing it helps me even if you don't post to this thread. Although written feedback is of course a lot more helpful than just data)

[Eyon]

Hey hi ! I just started the game, spent like 30 seconds on it and I wonder: Is there a way to mute the music ? It's not that I don't like it, it's because I intented to play the game listening to my own music. Anyway, it's be cool If we could mute the game ! =)