|
|
United Kingdom38257 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:02 Gosi wrote:
No Fy + fenrir combo no VG. Would rather see cty in one of the more veteran teams after TI3 instead of VG rebuilding something half assed.
DD back to retirement/casting, Ferrari to LGD, CTY to IG.
>_>
|
On June 10 2013 20:50 teapoted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 20:47 TheKefka wrote:On June 10 2013 19:00 teapoted wrote:
Ultimate notification is fine, it shouldn't be something visible on the hero model because not every hero has ravage. It's just another spell.
As for the rest, yes the UI is terrible. And it isn't going to change.
As a Dota 1 purist but at the same time designer I've said since day 1 that they should have dumped the WC3 UI. It simply isn't as important as people think it is to keep the same UI and you can always give people the option to use a classic UI. People talk about 'well they wouldn't use a classic then' because it's a lower field of view, but this isn't an FPS game, you're not getting any more information out of it you're just getting convenience. And people who think it will effect the balance of the game are just crazy, it would make people into better players maybe, but it's still the same game, you can still gather the same information, it's just slightly easier to gather the information.
And I'm not too fuzzed about minor things in the old UI I'd just like something where the developers at Valve can experiment. Because the only step forward from this UI is the top bar for heroes which I think is superior to what any other game does because it allows you to very quickly glance and see what the state is like without having to look at both left and right and do some analyzing over who is who which is often the case with hero portraits on the left.
The rest of the UI is just standard 10 year old stuff. If you had a blank slate there's so much you could do to make learning the game easier, to make basic mechanics smoother.
And this is not even counting the UI from a spectator stand-point. Although I wouldn't be completely surprised if we got more options in spectator mode in the future for things like hiding the entire UI, zoom out (things you can do in console), I wouldn't bet on it because they've gone this "replaceable HUD" model which is just plain silly. They could just implement a slider to manage the size of it at least.Even LoL has this,kinda miss it. No, they can't. They're never going to allow you to scale it because then they would have just scrapped it and made something new.
That doesn't make any sense lol
|
On June 10 2013 20:34 Asha` wrote:
Whelp, VG meltdown...
...I'm cursed =(
Damn dude, you really are :/ First Empire and now this. Join the Liquid side!
|
United Kingdom24425 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:09 TheKefka wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 20:50 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 20:47 TheKefka wrote:On June 10 2013 19:00 teapoted wrote:
Ultimate notification is fine, it shouldn't be something visible on the hero model because not every hero has ravage. It's just another spell.
As for the rest, yes the UI is terrible. And it isn't going to change.
As a Dota 1 purist but at the same time designer I've said since day 1 that they should have dumped the WC3 UI. It simply isn't as important as people think it is to keep the same UI and you can always give people the option to use a classic UI. People talk about 'well they wouldn't use a classic then' because it's a lower field of view, but this isn't an FPS game, you're not getting any more information out of it you're just getting convenience. And people who think it will effect the balance of the game are just crazy, it would make people into better players maybe, but it's still the same game, you can still gather the same information, it's just slightly easier to gather the information.
And I'm not too fuzzed about minor things in the old UI I'd just like something where the developers at Valve can experiment. Because the only step forward from this UI is the top bar for heroes which I think is superior to what any other game does because it allows you to very quickly glance and see what the state is like without having to look at both left and right and do some analyzing over who is who which is often the case with hero portraits on the left.
The rest of the UI is just standard 10 year old stuff. If you had a blank slate there's so much you could do to make learning the game easier, to make basic mechanics smoother.
And this is not even counting the UI from a spectator stand-point. Although I wouldn't be completely surprised if we got more options in spectator mode in the future for things like hiding the entire UI, zoom out (things you can do in console), I wouldn't bet on it because they've gone this "replaceable HUD" model which is just plain silly. They could just implement a slider to manage the size of it at least.Even LoL has this,kinda miss it. No, they can't. They're never going to allow you to scale it because then they would have just scrapped it and made something new. That doesn't make any sense lol 'To you'.
Look, if they were willing to scale the UI they would have completely re-designed it. They went into it saying "this is the amount of space we are taking up". And so they designed it that way. So if they are going to allow you to scale it, any designer would say "well we should just redesign it now that we don't have these restrictions".
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make.
|
I like the ui as it is but I can see why people would want a minimalist option. I could imagine people playing with just the minimap in one corner, small inventory in the other, and a small health and mana and stats display at the bottom, no skills no portrait. then just the clock, hero icons and the two menu buttons on top.
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
Sure, you could fiddle around with it, make everything smaller or bigger, etc. But reading teapoted's posts, it makes you think the UI could be completely different in some way, that's what I'm getting at.
|
O yeah I agree, it pretty much displays everything of value as it is.
|
On June 10 2013 21:04 Asha` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 21:02 Gosi wrote:
No Fy + fenrir combo no VG. Would rather see cty in one of the more veteran teams after TI3 instead of VG rebuilding something half assed. DD back to retirement/casting, Ferrari to LGD, CTY to IG. >_>
Should iG not place top3 at least in TI3 I think this is a very likely scenario.
|
United Kingdom24425 Posts
On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't.
And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).
Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center.
Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart.
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
On a similar note, was Starcraft 1 the first rts to have the UI mostly on the bottom of the screen? Dune and even Warcraft 2 still had the big bar on the side.
|
United Kingdom24425 Posts
On June 10 2013 22:24 cecek wrote:
On a similar note, was Starcraft 1 the first rts to have the UI mostly on the bottom of the screen? Dune and even Warcraft 2 still had the big bar on the side. Age of Empires had it at the bottom. Resources top left and map bottom right seems to make more sense in ltr cultures as well, but maybe tests have indicated otherwise.
![[image loading]](http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/05/04/images/AgeofEmpires.jpg)
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
Oh, nice. I didn't even know AoE 1 was older than starcraft 1, lol.
Just one thing on th Dota 2 UI. I don't think having a separate spectator UI is a good thing. I think it separates playing a watching the game too much. If you have almost identical UIs, it's easier for players just watching to start playing and vice versa - a player should have an easier time getting into watching pro games. Things like hiding it temporarily and zooming out temporarily I like, tho.
|
On June 10 2013 22:18 teapoted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't. And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center. Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart.
We could aswell remove denies, remove gold lost ond death, take out tps, and give everybody enough base manaregen to spam spells 24/7.
We might also add cool new features where new heroes have to be bought first before you can play them or smth like that.
Edit: This has nothing do with "dota-elitism" or anything close to that, those changes are simpy flat out dumb.
|
United Kingdom24425 Posts
On June 10 2013 22:43 gaymon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 22:18 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't. And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center. Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart. We could aswell remove denies, remove gold lost ond death, take out tps, and give everybody enough base manaregen to spam spells 24/7. We might also add cool new features where new heroes have to be bought first before you can play them or smth like that. Very insightful. Move along now.
Just one thing on th Dota 2 UI. I don't think having a separate spectator UI is a good thing. I think it separates playing a watching the game too much. If you have almost identical UIs, it's easier for players just watching to start playing and vice versa - a player should have an easier time getting into watching pro games. Things like hiding it temporarily and zooming out temporarily I like, tho. I don't think people would have a problem with it but no I don't think they should be different either, just that the bulk is a bigger problem when spectating and needs to be more flexible.
Look at TI2, even valve had problems with that UI when they were putting cameras in for the players during drafts they just shoved a silly looking window on the right side pushed against the edge, it looked awful.
|
On June 10 2013 22:45 teapoted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 22:43 gaymon wrote:On June 10 2013 22:18 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't. And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center. Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart. We could aswell remove denies, remove gold lost ond death, take out tps, and give everybody enough base manaregen to spam spells 24/7. We might also add cool new features where new heroes have to be bought first before you can play them or smth like that. Very insightful. Move along now.
He is correct though, it's a dangerous path when you start to simplify things which dumb down gameplay. Being able to see your opponents exact mana is sweet if you're playing anti-mage and want to calculate how your ulti will do, but a good player can do that anyway by clicking the target and checking. It's harder to do, but that's an aspect of skill. You have to weigh it, is it worth dumbing it down for the casual players at the cost of lowering the skillcap? Since Dota is by many considered a very high-tier competitive game, it's extra dangerous to dumb it down.
|
On June 10 2013 22:29 teapoted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 22:24 cecek wrote:
On a similar note, was Starcraft 1 the first rts to have the UI mostly on the bottom of the screen? Dune and even Warcraft 2 still had the big bar on the side. Age of Empires had it at the bottom. Resources top left and map bottom right seems to make more sense in ltr cultures as well, but maybe tests have indicated otherwise.
Fuck, I just realized AOE has its minimap on the right side.
I've been playing 1/2/3 since 99, and for whatever reason, I've never noticed that the Minimap isn't in the same place as SC/SC2/Dota
Wow.
Fuck.
|
Lalalaland34507 Posts
You're obviously a LoL player at heart.
|
United Kingdom24425 Posts
On June 10 2013 22:48 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 22:45 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 22:43 gaymon wrote:On June 10 2013 22:18 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't. And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center. Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart. We could aswell remove denies, remove gold lost ond death, take out tps, and give everybody enough base manaregen to spam spells 24/7. We might also add cool new features where new heroes have to be bought first before you can play them or smth like that. Very insightful. Move along now. He is correct though, it's a dangerous path when you start to simplify things which dumb down gameplay. Being able to see your opponents exact mana is sweet if you're playing anti-mage and want to calculate how your ulti will do, but a good player can do that anyway by clicking the target and checking. It's harder to do, but that's an aspect of skill. You have to weigh it, is it worth dumbing it down for the casual players at the cost of lowering the skillcap? Since Dota is by many considered a very high-tier competitive game, it's extra dangerous to dumb it down. He is not correct as I didn't mention changing any mechanics.
People who think being obtuse is a good way to increase skillcap can't have much value for real high level play.
If you want to move the game forward, make it easier for beginners and keep it the same for the best. The LoL analogy doesn't work as they removed high level mechanics. I'd rather see more high level mechanics in Dota and less difficulty coming from it being a sub-optimal playing experience.
|
On June 10 2013 22:48 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2013 22:45 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 22:43 gaymon wrote:On June 10 2013 22:18 teapoted wrote:On June 10 2013 21:44 cecek wrote:
I'm not a graphical artist or a designer, but I don't really see how you could revolutionize the UI. There's a minimap, which is essential for this kind of game, and where else would you stick that than one of the bottom corners? Then inventory slots and skills. Again, absolutely essential, need to be well visible. The bottom of the screen seems like the appropriate place for it. Then there's the hero portrait, which I can imagine you could do without, but I don't see why. It tells you quickly what unit you're controlling and it has an estetic function as well. I guess the only thing they could change would be the rest: the quick buy field, courier icons, glyph and unit stats. That might be possible to change, but I don't see any drastic change that would make. Well it wouldn't be revolutionary if it was obvious would it? The point is that not working in the restrictions of cloning a 10 year old UI would allow for anything, while at the moment, it doesn't. And there's a lot to achieve without 'revolutionizing'. The ulti active icon isn't revolutionary yet it makes people better players and makes the game easier to watch. There are a lot of things in this regard which could be done, better ways of showing health and mana, ways of conveying mana costs of multiple skills combined (like alt+click abilities and they add together in your mana bar), better ways of conveying valid targets, better ways of designing a mini-map especially for newer players (hell you could take the classic diablo map and just overlay it large in transparency on the left and it would drastically increase map awareness of new players).Then there's a lot to be said for simplifying and how it can help newer players. And there's a lot to be said for better spectator experiences. And there's a lot to be said for increasing the aesthetic appeal of the game by going away from looking into a window in the center. Ultimately, neither I as a designer or you as not would need to have a hundred great ideas off the top of our heads to decide if more can be done by not working under restrictions. And either way I care more about the spectator experience which I could think of a hundred ideas of the top of my head for how it could be improved if you removed the bar at the top and the bottom and allowed anything. Just look at gameheart. We could aswell remove denies, remove gold lost ond death, take out tps, and give everybody enough base manaregen to spam spells 24/7. We might also add cool new features where new heroes have to be bought first before you can play them or smth like that. Very insightful. Move along now. He is correct though, it's a dangerous path when you start to simplify things which dumb down gameplay. Being able to see your opponents exact mana is sweet if you're playing anti-mage and want to calculate how your ulti will do, but a good player can do that anyway by clicking the target and checking. It's harder to do, but that's an aspect of skill. You have to weigh it, is it worth dumbing it down for the casual players at the cost of lowering the skillcap? Since Dota is by many considered a very high-tier competitive game, it's extra dangerous to dumb it down.
I disagree with you. Teapoted was talking about ui, gaymon is talking about mechanics, they are not the same at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
7843
3798
763
139
EPT
