DayZ SA/BIS games. Slicker presentation?

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

The GUI in Arma is just about the minimum that is enough. Bit better wouldn't be bad though. When I buy a "hardcore game" or sim I  expect very simple looking GUI and I'd be very surprised if it looks cool. Mostly in those kind of games it's just there and works (or doesn't).

But why though?  Why does a "hardcore" dedicated PC game have to look bad?  Is it just because we're used to it and accept it as the norm? 

 

It doesn't.  It's laziness as far as I can see.  Having a small budget/team is no excuse either.  There's plenty of games like that with nice UI's but they seem to be in the minority because the UI get's overlooked.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Fraggle

[Wayze 549]

In my experience there's nothing worse than a project lead that doesn't give the UI designers any artistic licence.  I've not been involved in game design but I have been involved in website design (although I hate it) and I can imagine many of the same issues arise

In my experience there's nothing worse than a project lead without any "artistic" foundations. As I said previously, to me, game design is an art. A game is a vision, a concept. In that matter game development has changed very much.

Look at games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, Assassins Creed. In the beginning, all of these were visions, concepts. Someone had an idea, and wanted to turn it into a game. All of these developers turned into something different, when they realised that their concept is much more valuable than they thought. None of them have visions anymore, they just take the concept, look what would most people enjoy and try to turn it into simple money.

This is why in my opinion it is very essential for a game to have someone in the lead who has this one vision. It is like writing a book, like making a movie, like drawing a picture. You have your own vision of your game, but the more people try to take that vision, turn it into something different, something that has more potential to sell good, then your vision will probably change. What you wanted the game to be, sadly will never occur.

New ideas, new gameplay mechanics, all of these things will just vanishe into dust.

This is the reason why indie developers are so successful. Back the days, every single developer was practacly an indie developer. It changed when people realised that behind these games is a very huge potential for alot of money. But indie developers, they are able to have these visions, without them being destroyed by some scientificly correct statistics that show that a certain gameplay element would not fit into a game. These people are the only real developers these days. But sadly again, people realised that behind these indie developers, there is a lot of potential for a lot of money. How this will turn out in the next few years, we will see.

What I can tell you now is that people who try to use statistics and science for game designing, people who develope a game for the only purpose of money, will most likely totally fail in what they are doing. Look at all the games that try to imitate Call of Duty. I always ask myself, who the f*ck is developing these games? I mean, they probably sit at their desks and think "Guys, we need a game like CoD, someone has any ideas?".

The same with movies ofcourse. But these movies and games will never reach the value of the visions of others. They just don't realise that you need to want to make a game, not to want to make money with a game. Sure, Call of Duty is successful, but before they turned into a money cow, they actually were these "indie" developers, trying something new, something different. A person, or a group, with a vision. It was successful and they built on this success.

But the problem is that so many developers try to built on the same success. They try to imitate the games, without having any "dreams". They don't think about it like Dean Hall thinks about a game.

Dean hall wanted to develope the first real survival game ever. He surely didn't think of it like "What would most people enjoy?", but he thought of it like "What would I enjoy?"

 

If a developer has this vision, he surely will be concerned about the presentation of his game. He wants it to look good, not just because people may not buy it otherwise, but because this game is something important to him. If I draw a pictures, I surely want it to look good even if nobody on earth will ever see it. I want it to look good to proof to myself that I am able to make it look good.

Mostly, if a person has talent and the vision, he doesn't even need a UI Designer. He has his own vision of the UI, he knows how he wants it to look like. He tells someone who is capable of doing it, a designer that trained for years how to take a vision and turn it on the screen. But in the end, this vision is the vision of the project lead. Only he has the whole picture of the game. But for this, you need to have a real talent. Most of the people are not capable of doing so and as I see Dean having to discuss elementary gameplay features with his team, I am really not sure if he has a real vision. If he has the talent. Sure he had a good idea and it was successful. But it kind of looks like they decide demoraticly about certain gameplay features, which is in my opinion kind of, lame. Sure, maybe Deans vision is absolutly awful and nobody would like it, but it has the potential of being really, really good. If you take many people and every single of them has his own vision, the game that turns out in the end will be a collection of parts of all these visions. It probably will be successful, but it may have wasted alot of potential.

 

So my conclusion is that, I don't really care much about UI. Or to put it in other words, I am not concerned about it being bad in the SA. Dean and his team surely put alot of thought into these kind of things, so nope, I think it will be ok.

And additionally, there is almost no UI in the actuall game, so why would I even care about it being good or bad? I will see the menu maybe for like 20 seconds, playing the game for hours. So no, even if the UI is bad, really bad, I don't think it would concern me while playing the game.

[dgeesio 1034]

 

Well it seems like people mainly want the same thing from a game then in terms of the UI.

 

Functionality comes first but to many the actual look and feel of it is equally important as long as it's in keeping with the game.  To me both of those things actually go hand in hand and in my experience that's what design is all about.

 

There's some games where a slightly over the top UI works.  Codemasters always have really nice menu's for their racing games.  They're in your face and a tad dramatic but for the racing games they're designed for they fit well because the games themselves are all about giving you the adrenaline rush of racing.  The swooshing menu's and heavy music add to the overall experience you're looking for when playing an arcadey racer.  

 

For slower paced games something much more minimalistic, clean and functional usually fits the bill although in my eyes that's still no excuse to leave it looking like it was designed by a colour-blind programmer.

 

In my experience there's nothing worse than a project lead that doesn't give the UI designers any artistic licence.  I've not been involved in game design but I have been involved in website design (although I hate it) and I can imagine many of the same issues arise.

 

Usually you have a guy in charge that has a very clear picture in his head of what he wants things to look like.  Sadly from a design point of view 90% of the time what he has in his head sucks.  Instead of letting the artist/designer do what they're good at and then then go through a proper design process until both parties are happy, you end up with the guy in charge basically dictating to the artist exactly how things should be.  The outcome is usually something that looks like shit and isn't practical to use because the artist/designer hasn't been given enough freedom to what they do best, in reality they've just acted as the boss's hands.  The only person happy with the outcome in that scenario is the project lead because his ego has been massaged.  The designer is left frustrated and the end user is left with something that isn't very pleasant to use.

 

Anyhoo, I just hope that the SA devs spend some time in the future actually making the SA look like a professionally presented game.  Just because it's a "hardcore" game aimed at us hipsters doesn't mean it can't look nice.  We like pretty things too QQ.

 

hahah i was actually telling a codemasters dev few days ago how i hate the gui and thats the main example of what i meant in my post ! :lol:  love there games but not the gui !

 

hi im ken block im going to be racing with you today :rolleyes:  black bars in play back mode so its not fullscreen :o  makes no sense. let me race i dont need hand held and stop telling me stuff before i race i want to just play the game as easy as possible without useless stuff inbetween ;)

 

 

so start game pick race go ! that is it no fancy shit fullscreen and as much camera angles as possible for playback for videos .

Edited October 31, 2013 by dgeesio

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

hahah i was actually telling a codemasters dev few days ago how i hate the gui and thats the main example of what i meant in my post ! :lol:  love there games but not the gui !

 

hi im ken block im going to be racing with you today :rolleyes:  black bars in play back mode so its not fullscreen :o  makes no sense. let me race i dont need hand held and stop telling me stuff before i race i want to just play the game as easy as possible without useless stuff inbetween ;)

 

 

so start game pick race go ! that is it no fancy shit fullscreen and as much camera angles as possible for playback for videos .

Haha I guess that shows ho hard it is to please everyone.  I may be wrong but I think Codemasters actually won some industry awards for their UI design, I think it was quite a while ago though.  I like the OTT graphics/presentation for a game like that, but yeh that Ken dude needs to shut up.

[finalstraw 193]

Getting the functionality, readability and responsiveness nailed should take priority in a UI over looks everytime. Not everything is visual, you can often give great feedback with simple audio cues. I'm not concerned too much about the UI despite some of the menus and buttons looking a bit crude from what's been shown, but Arma/BI games normally do the job fine.

 

My only real concern is the map and journal implementation (if at all), from what has been shown the map simply comes up full screen (during this time the player is immobile) and even has an awkward loading screen when it 'closes' (almost identical to the mod). What would be nice to see is perhaps turning the map into an object. For example:

 

To view the map (or the pieces of it) you actually hold it up. You could move it around moving the mouse in the relevant direction, but the player can continue moving at a walking pace.

 

 

Just using Far Cry as example, I'd hope the see the journal implemented in a similar fashion (if that's still a go).

[puppetworx 474]

It doesn't matter to me. Obviously, from all the responses above, a lot of people would like it to look better, and it may in fact sell more games if it were 'prettier'. For me I don't care, the game world already looks great so functionality is what's really important for the UI.

 

While developing a pretty UI (such as the Far Cry one above) may help sell games I challenge wether it actually makes the game any better. As a matter of fact I do think it would make the game better, just not by very much. Since the DayZ development team is so small I can't see them ever coming to a point where aesthetic UI changes should become a focus for improving the game, the opportunity cost would be too high. If you're Ubisoft you can do it, if not you're probably neglecting another more important improvement by tinkering with UI.

 

It may be something that the modding community can really take charge of, down the line, as happened with Skyrim.

[gummy52 57]

Let's be realistic here. You're not just asking if we want a cool interface or a simple one. I like a minimalistic interface. I think ArmA 2's looks perfectly fine. DayZ's interface looks like vomit coughed up from MSPaint. It's absurd that we need to debate this. Fix the bloody interface already.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Let's be realistic here. You're not just asking if we want a cool interface or a simple one. I like a minimalistic interface. I think ArmA 2's looks perfectly fine. DayZ's interface looks like vomit coughed up from MSPaint. It's absurd that we need to debate this. Fix the bloody interface already.

Sorry but wtf are you even on about?  Why is it absurd to discuss it?  That's what forums are for you you silly duck.

[gummy52 57]

Why is it absurd to discuss it?

Asking whether or not we would like to see them spend more "time and effort" on the interface is ridiculous. Debating it would be like debating whether or not there should be trees in Chernarus. It looks like crap. Either they fix it or bust.

Edited November 1, 2013 by gummy52

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Asking whether or not we would like to see them spend more "time and effort" on the interface is ridiculous. Debating it would be like debating whether or not there should be trees in Chernarus. It looks like crap. Either they fix it or bust.

You seem to be missing the point of my initial post again... :/.

 

Firstly you're showing me an already outdated pic of the inventory screen for the SA, as you know it's still heavy in development and will continue to evolve over time.  Secondly, I'm asking about the overall presentation of the game including the option menus, splash screens, UI,  the whole package.

 

I'm also wondering about what people think about games in general and how important presentation is to them.

 

If that sounds ridiculous to you then I'm terribly sorry, I thought it was a fairly harmless topic.

 

It's not a complicated subject to grasp, I just thought it would be interesting to discuss.  Sorry for making you so angry.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Fraggle

[Zombie Jesus 723]

Let's be realistic here. You're not just asking if we want a cool interface or a simple one. I like a minimalistic interface. I think ArmA 2's looks perfectly fine. DayZ's interface looks like vomit coughed up from MSPaint. It's absurd that we need to debate this. Fix the bloody interface already.

 

 

I think ArmA 2's looks perfectly fine

ArmA 2's looks perfectly fine

ArmA 2's

 

Wait, what? I get everyone has different tastes but the interface was terrible and there is a difference between minimalist and functional. They can be both but the words are not synonyms and for DayZ the inventory system was terrible. 

Edited November 1, 2013 by Zombie Jesus

[gummy52 57]

you're showing me an already outdated pic of the inventory screen for the SA

It's the one from the most recent video last month.

 

interface was terrible [...] functional

I didn't say it functioned well, I said it looked fine. It does. Edited November 1, 2013 by gummy52

[Hetstaine 10852]

.it looks fine...in your opinion. 

 

In my opinion i thought the arma2  was terrible..but i got used to it and even grew to like it. But i think you will find many more disliked it than liked it..but you liked it. That doesn't make you wrong, it is just your opinion. Like you not liking the revised one so far. Once again you are not wrong, but you have formed an opinion on it. Well done. We all have them.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

It's the one from the most recent video last month.

And as I said, already it's outdated.  The game is in heavy development and it will continue to change frequently, atm their focus is the functionality.  You know this.  That's why in my initial post I said "much further on in development".

 

Anyhoo, moving on...

 

I don't want this discussion to focus purely on the inventory but oh well.  I actually hated the Arma2 inventory.  It looked ok (although even back when it was released it looked dated) but was a mess to use, it was anything but intuitive and that's what this topic is about.  It doesn't have to be function vs looks, you can have both.  Usually the first complaint new players to the game have whether it's the DayZ mod or Arma 2 itself is regarding how hard the inventory is to figure out.  It's fine when you've spent some time getting used to it (although still clunky) but a well designed UI shouldn't be that hard to figure out.

 

Arma 3 has made some great improvements (in my opinion) and the whole thing is cleaner, quicker and easier to use but I know there's some that don't like it.

 

PC gamers don't just accept hard to navigate interfaces, they seem to like them.  Maybe it's an ego thing and makes them feel superior to thier console gaming counterparts.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Fraggle

[dgeesio 1034]

simpliest and best is call of duty classes. people hate cod but it is great design.

[gummy52 57]

And as I said, already it's outdated.

 

The most up to date image available is out of date? I guess you have inside information, but if that's the case, and the interface's presentation has been improved (as you're suggesting), then why are you asking if the interface's presentation should be improved? Why even ask us if we have no frame of reference? It's clear you're merely speculating. That image is not out of date and all you're doing is deflecting.

 

I'll say it again. Forget "slicker presentation", DayZ's is not yet even tolerable.

Edited November 1, 2013 by gummy52

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

The most up to date image available is out of date? I guess you have inside information, but if that's the case, and the interface's presentation has been improved (as you're suggesting), then why are you asking if the interface's presentation should be improved? Why even ask us if we have no frame of reference? It's clear you're merely speculating.

That image is not out of date and all you're doing is deflecting.

Gummy, if you have nothing to offer this thread apart from your usual rubbish then please move on.

 

I've created a perfectly harmless topic for discussion.  The reason I say that the most recent picture you've seen is outdated is because it is, as part of the testing group I get to see the daily progress of the game and as I've already said the game is in heavy development so things change frequently.

 

I'm deflecting nothing, I'm trying to steer a harmless topic that has somehow offended you back on course.  If you carry on trying to dominate the thread with what I can only deem to be trolling I'll act accordingly. 

[gummy52 57]

Your rebuttals are nothing more than "you're wrong because I'm right" and you assert them with "stop or I'll ban you". Your topic is on DayZ's interface yet you dismiss up to date public information because of your unknown inside knowledge. Under those rules you can dismiss any negative discussion under the pretense that my opinion is invalid because I'm not a part of the pre-alpha testing. I ask again, why ask posters' opinion, then?

[boneboys 7988]

You've turned this into a personal argumentt Gummy.

Don't.

[mercules 1290]

 

The most up to date image available is out of date? I guess you have inside information, but if that's the case, and the interface's presentation has been improved (as you're suggesting), then why are you asking if the interface's presentation should be improved? Why even ask us if we have no frame of reference? It's clear you're merely speculating. That image is not out of date and all you're doing is deflecting.

 

I'll say it again. Forget "slicker presentation", DayZ's is not yet even tolerable.

 

You really need to reread the original post and then think about if your posts are in that frame of reference. It was talking about the SA but also about games in general.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

You really need to reread the original post and then think about if your posts are in that frame of reference. It was talking about the SA but also about games in general.

It's ok, Gummy knows exactly what he's doing.  It's beyond tedious.

 

Getting the functionality, readability and responsiveness nailed should take priority in a UI over looks everytime. Not everything is visual, you can often give great feedback with simple audio cues. I'm not concerned too much about the UI despite some of the menus and buttons looking a bit crude from what's been shown, but Arma/BI games normally do the job fine.

 

My only real concern is the map and journal implementation (if at all), from what has been shown the map simply comes up full screen (during this time the player is immobile) and even has an awkward loading screen when it 'closes' (almost identical to the mod). What would be nice to see is perhaps turning the map into an object. For example:

 

To view the map (or the pieces of it) you actually hold it up. You could move it around moving the mouse in the relevant direction, but the player can continue moving at a walking pace.

 

 

Just using Far Cry as example, I'd hope the see the journal implemented in a similar fashion (if that's still a go).

I love the UI in Far Cry, it's a shame the two sequels were nowhere near as good as the first gameplay wise but I did enjoy the way they made you feel like you were actually playing as the character with animations and the UI you showed above.

 

I know in the SA they said the map will now be found in segments but in the long run it'd be great to see some more work done with that, tbh I can't remember if they've ever spoken about it.

[Krobar 75]

 

I know in the SA they said the map will now be found in segments but in the long run it'd be great to see some more work done with that, tbh I can't remember if they've ever spoken about it.

 

I'd like to see different kinds of maps. Maybe the most common one just being a road atlas showing just roads. Just as common to those maybe hiking maps showing topography and landscape. Higher tiers go into police and militia to military, as what we see today as our maps with all the buildings and whatnot on them.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

I'd like to see different kinds of maps. Maybe the most common one just being a road atlas showing just roads. Just as common to those maybe hiking maps showing topography and landscape. Higher tiers go into police and militia to military, as what we see today as our maps with all the buildings and whatnot on them.

I like that idea too.  A while ago somebody posted a suggestion about putting maps on bustops etc in the towns.  I know veteran players learn the map after a while but it'd still be a nice touch.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Fraggle

[dgeesio 1034]

in the main game i play theHunter we use a pda for map just right click see whole map simple and works.

[Krobar 75]

I like that idea too.  A while ago somebody posted a suggestion about putting maps on bustops etc in the towns.  I know veteran players learn the map after a while but it'd still be a nice touch.

I have noticed from various footage of towns that the team behind Chernarus Plus's design has issued at least a placeholder for a bus terminal where one would go buy bus tickets. Filling that with route maps would be cool. It'd be like John Every-man's basic starter map.