What is the problem with SE5? - Page 7

Uncle_Joe · #61 January 25th, 2007, 05:48 AM

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

Azselendor · #62 January 25th, 2007, 10:11 AM

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

Suicide Junkie · #63 January 25th, 2007, 10:37 AM

The problem is that Simpler != Easier

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

President_Elect_Shang · #64 January 25th, 2007, 11:27 AM

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"?

PDF · #65 January 25th, 2007, 12:29 PM

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.

AstralWanderer · #66 January 25th, 2007, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Phoenix-D said:
That and its not like implementing MP takes much time or effort (with the exception of TCP/IP play).

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.

Quote:

Uncle_Joe said:
And IMO if they want to do a single-player game then thats fine if it works (which it appears to do). But what bugs me about it is the attitude that they are so right because of their 'poll'. If you conduct a 'poll' under heavily weighted conditions, then you can get the results to favor whatever premise you choose. And thats what I feel happened there.

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.

Atrocities · #67 January 25th, 2007, 01:06 PM

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

Azselendor · #68 January 25th, 2007, 01:13 PM

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

Azselendor · #69 January 25th, 2007, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Atrocities said:
Image Link

I definitely agree with those assessments there. I see you also like a simpler game with that little "cheat code" prompt .

President_Elect_Shang · #70 January 25th, 2007, 01:51 PM

@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.