Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Again, a slightly misconstrued reference - but I will say he probably doesn't get much of a chance to play for fun...

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

...besides playing GalCiv.

...I mean, only for the purpose of investigation of course.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Although it took only a few months of implementation, CB did simmer for years in the planning stages. Then another long while of upgrades and refinements.

And CB is just a mod, not a game engine.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I believe a more accurate comparison would be steve jobs at apple using windows instead of a mac

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Azselendor said:
but personally I think Aaron needs to consider taking SE6 in a more modern direction than the other games.

This statement is intriguing -- you may have reached the very question we're searching for. How, specifically, do you think SE6 should be made more "modern" than SE4 or SE5?

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

By Forced Simplification.

This process basically dictates that every aspect of the game's interface needs to be reduced to a point where as little thought as possible is needed in the determination of how to do something.

For example, component placement in ship design in SE5 requires you to click on a component, then place it on the ship schematic, then click to install it (i guess that's the word?) on to the schematic and so on.
Forced Simplification would force it to operate via drag and drop with the computer also able to allow us to double click a component to automatically install it into the design.

Another would be to remove the panning, zooming, and scrolling buttons and allow the player to merely right click and drag the camera while holding it to the position and angle the user desires, zooming would of course be handled by holding the right mouse button and spinning the scroll wheel back and forth.

And similar steps could be taken across the interface to reduce the insane number of mouse clicks required to do a single task.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Using right-click for the camera would remove it for the UI, and I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Azselendor said:
Forced Simplification would force it to operate via drag and drop...

Except that drag and drop is the same number of operations. Mouse down, move, mouse up, versus: Mouse click, move, mouse click. I'm not sure how that makes the interface any simpler to use?

Though really, drag and drop is a lot more operations overall, because in the current system you can do simple shift-clicks to add multiple copies of the same component without moving back to the component list and reselecting it. Double-click for auto placement beats both though.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

most people are used to drag and drop as a natural function of computer usage. Forced Simplification forces us to use simplest and most natural means of accomplishing a task.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I just don't see how it would provide any improvement what-so-ever. There is a visual indicator of what is happening when you click on a component, just as you see in a normal drag and drop. It might take a split second to retry with just a click if you first try a drag and drop, but that is all.

If the current system was eliminated and replaced with drag and drop, it would slow ship design down tremendously. Drag and drop of one item at a time is extremely tedious. You could potentially keep the shift functionality to be able to add a second (and a twelfth) copy of a component with just clicks on nearby boxes, but that would seem to violate the "forced simplification."

"Forced Simplification" seems a little like buzz word marketing to me... ala synergy.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I cant honestly say that drag and drop would make things any easier for me either.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Actually Fyron, Forced Simplification isn't a buzzword. It's a term that originates in gaming and pioneered by the MIT BlackJack team.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

The problem is that Simpler != Easier

And I agree with Fy. Forced Simplification sounds a lot like a buzzword... maybe a larval buzzword.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Buzzword or not I agree with Fyron and SJ. Drag and drop does not mean natural or simple. Point in case click move click; the current system, was the only system at one time. Had you asked then it would have been called the "natural" system. Now we have drag and drop which is replacing click move click. Which is natural? With all due respects to the MIT team they don't study humans so they have no bases to call anything "natural". There is nothing natural about either click or drag. It is a matter of current trend. In this case current trend will detract from functionality. I suppose than the real question we should be asking is "Which is more fun; functionality or current trend"?

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

No, there's a real difference that has nothing to do with trends or buzz: compare to real life manual manipulation, with your hands you take an object, keep it in hands then put it elsewhere, you can't take it and then put it without having carried it in the meantime !

So drag&drop is more "natural" as it's closer to real life behavior.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Doesn't that really depend on the game design? Multiplayer can raise issues like simultaneous changes to (and visibility of) game elements, robustness and security (to prevent cheating), data structure size (who wants to have to download several gigabytes of data for a single turn?) and even basic features like whether a player should be able to pause at will. For some games, MP is certainly going to be simple but for others it could require fundamental design changes.Well any poll they conduct is going to have some element of bias. As long as the poll is open to all though, that is about as fair as a website can get. Also Stardock have produced several MP games prior to GalCiv (e.g. Stellar Frontier, The Political Machine) so they are likely to have plenty of experience with the issues involved.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

The Log window is one such area that could use some attention. Scrolling through tones and tones of combat info is not helpful. This information should be minimized and only expanded if the player wishes it.

The fact that when you click on an object featuring details in the main screen, say a planet or a ship, all you get is a larger, useless image of that object. However there is this small little icon that you click and it brings up item information. I think these need to be switched. You click on the item, you should get that items information, not a larger image of it.

I posted about improving information on the main screen when you have a planet with several ships in orbit, currently the system provides no intuitiveness and you must click on each individual item to determine its status. I think this area should be improved along the lines of what I have already posted about. (Had an image and all.)

Image Link

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

To point out, the MIT BlackJack team coined Forced Simplification by reducing the game of blackjack from 52 cards (or 104 depending on style) to a scoring of 3 cards.

PDF points out a key point of forced simplification is that it is about the most natural behavior is the most preferred.

Another example of is demonstrated in Apple's keynote speech that introduced the iPhone and further demonstrated when placed against any other smart phone.

http://www.apple.com/
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/

Google is yet another example of forcing something complex to be simple to use when compared to the previous top dog, yahoo.
http://www.yahoo.com/ vs. http://www.google.com/

Now while your opinion may be that it is a buzzword, I should point out that games developed with easy of use, usability, and accessibility in mind frequently preform better in the market than ones that are not. Same goes for products in the market, websites, and many more.

The best example of this is the Shopping Cart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopping_cart#History

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I definitely agree with those assessments there. I see you also like a simpler game with that little "cheat code" prompt . http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

@PDF: You may think that would be the case. But you can't compare a mouse operation to holding something. Two totally different sets of movements are going on. Not the least of which is the orientation of the hand. Sorry but hominids are my field of training and while what you say sounds logical it just doesn't hold true. Now if natural is being used in place of easy than I would agree, a drag and drop operation is easier to perform. However, that has nothing to do with natural, easy is not always natural. Just look out your window and think how easy it is to make a 100 mile trip driving your car as opposed to walking. That's easy, but its not natural. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

A car is not natural, but it is natural to our habits, so is its design overall. Consider all the little features in cars that have come and gone because they, while some designer thought it was useful, aren't that useful in reality.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

If by "fair" you mean accurate, then from a statistical analysis perspective a web poll open to all is just about the worst kind of poll you can do. Really the only way you could do worse would be to go out of your way to find a biased sample group. Something like taking a survey to see if people support tougher sentencing laws, but only asking convicted felons. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

You have to do all sorts of random sampling and other statistical stuff to get a survey that produces data worth using. Web polls are useless are far as getting useful data. The only thing they are good for is driving traffic to whatever site they are on. People like to feel like their opinion matters, and a web polls gives them a nice warm feeling. But the only people seriously paying attention to the results are the other people who voted.

Geoschmo

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

That is the point, it is not natural. There is a difference between natural and easy. Easy may be based on habit but that does not make it automatically natural. Civilization is not natural, small groups are but civilization is easier than small groups for security, survival and so forth. You are still interchanging the two terms. The car may have been a poor example. I used it since both achieve a natural goal. The desire to move from point A to point B. That is hominid nature and extends to most every species on the planet. Cars make it easy to achieve a goal; despite the motives. In other words we are not sedentary, we don't have roots, we can't sit in one place our whole lives and survive. Again that does not make cars natural. By the same manner there is nothing natural about computers or using them. Also please keep in mind that habit does not mean natural. In most every case habit is shaped to achieve a natural goal. Anyway lets move along.

Even though I probably shouldn't go there... Geo is right. One of the big no-no's is to try a survey on the internet. The AAA would laugh you out of the profession if you even tried to base a research paper off an on-line survey. One of my professors went so far as to threaten an automatic failing grade if we tried it on any of our research papers. As SJ would put it On-line survey != Fair.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

the thing about humans is that we are, by definition, outside of the rules of nature because of our behaviors. We manipulate and change our environment to make our lives easier. We didn't like walking, so we domesticated horses. Horses were too demanding, so we invented cars. We didn't like swimming so we invented boats, and so on. Now I admit there is nothing natural about a machine-made item, but then again comparing nature to machine makes about as much sense as comparing apples and oranges.

To me, SE5 (Danger! Returning to the topic), is a jarring experience for many veterans fans and newcomers because of its quagmire interface.

Now several of you denounced Drag and Drop, but I submit to you that without that function, you would not be able to tolerate using any computer for more than five minutes. Move a file using the same method of clicks in SE5 and my case is proven. Drag and Drop is a very natural function of Object Orientated Interfaces and I will say Aaron was a fool to ignore it.

Some day I will sit down and write out a nice big essay with pictures and a power point and all my little ideas on how to fix SE5 and why SE5 is behind SE3 and 4 in playability, but whatever.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

Drag and drop in a file browser is only tolerable because you can select as many items as you want at a time to move. If you had to drag and drop files one at a time, it would be really useless compared to cut and paste. My issue with drag and drop for adding components in SE5 is exactly that... you would only be able to do them one a time. You could not easily use shift to very quickly add 12 engines, if you had to use drag and drop.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

In which case in only makes sense for aaron to add similar abilities. Shift to select a wide range of components and ctrl to pick and choose which ones, then move in mass.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

But that doesn't work with the slot layout setup. It would work in a SE4 or SE3 type system where you just have lists (but clicks to add are much better there anyways), but not with slot layout.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

That and..how exactly are you going to shift-select 6 engines if there's only one engine in the component list?

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

actually it is with a little forethought. Basically it would have to be modified so that when I drag an engine and it's not placed in an engine spot, it pops to a free engine spot automatically. Or if I grab 3 engines, support components like bridge, life support, etc, and some weapons and then a slab of armor, those would automatically drop into their required places.

As for populating components, perhaps a "fill to max" toggle on the design screen to load up components in multiples. there are a couple ways of resolving that issue. (double click & auto-placement comes to mind as the best solution)

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

The point is that you CANT grab multiple copies of the same item using a drag and drop system.

And if you are going to have automatic placement of the items, then you should go with SE4's superior tap-to-add system.

You also seem to forget that there are no engine slots... there are only Inner Hull, Outer Hull and Armor.
Some mods have only one or two slot types, and some components can be placed in multiple slot types.

Fill to max dosen't have much use outside of stock engines... And it would get really confused over the requirements in GGmod.


----


You could do:
- Tap to add. (Auto placement)
- Drag and drop to shuffle components already added.
- Tap to remove (drag/drop with no movement)

If the placement were smart, say, placing the components in locations similar to the positions used in other designs, that might be decent.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

There are no "required places" though. Anything but armor can be placed in any slot.

The best solution for a slot layout is to keep what we have now, though maybe add a double click to auto add to a random slot... There are far more important, actually effectual things Aaron should be spending his time on than a drag and drop that at best equals what we have now.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

lol, I've been playing starfury a wee bit too much now I think (btw, let's hold an online poll to get Aaron to port that to the console! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif)

As i said, people have made up their minds on this issue and so be it. Whatever.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

It should be easy enough for Aaron to add the functionality where double-clicking a component puts in the appropriate slot automatically - the AI scripts already contain functions that do that sort thing.

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I suggested that a looooong while ago and he said it can't be done. No explanation. Go figure. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

The UI part could almost certainly be done...
I imagine the problem would be in that the AI script dosen't deal with single components, but rather creates an entire design on its own.

Which is why the "place it as close as possible to where other existing designs have placed theirs"
IE, if all your designs to date have the engines in the bottom middle, then autoplace the engines in the bottom middle.
If you've got lots of ships with supply tanks symmetrical on the left and right sides, then doubleclicked supply tanks should go to the left or right (whichever has unused slots).

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

The AI places each component individual in a slot when making the design. It is told if the component is placed on armor/inner/outer slots and if it should be spread from the bottom or not. Using the same logic, I don't see why Aaron couldn't duplicate it in game unless it can't read the component to see if it's a innie or an outie - which it is implicitly told in the design script. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

I also don't see why it should not work, yet he declined to implement it. But maybe if enough people peg him with a stick... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: What is the problem with SE5?
 

CK:
Well, that puts me out of ideas for why it wouldn't work. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif