If you haven't been reading my blog it may not be immediately apparent what I am about to talk about, but that's ok, you can go read the pertinent material here if you like, or just stick around for a bit. I wanted to talk about the design of battle.net and why I feel, and have felt for a long time now in the PC space, that games (post 2000's) have woefully ignored the robust nature of the platform, and how the current SC2 client could be improved upon to create a better experience worthy of the PC.
You can certainly place a lot of blame on the console market for this slowly developing trend as when a company designs a cross-platform game they need to take into account the various levels of interaction that a user can or will have with their title. In designing these levels of interaction, the more succinct the operation the less development time is needed, and less bug testing. So at least monetarily speaking I can understand this decision to a degree. That being said, having recently played System Shock 2 (or simply reminiscing on older PC games I've played, Deus Ex being another good example) and the more direct usage of the keyboard as an interactive source in the world (typing on keypads for instance) I am continually reminded of past days where these accoutrements were fantastic editions to the impact of the system and the more directly affected nature of interacting with a UI on this level.
Thus we come to Blizzard, a company who hasn't designed a game for the console since they were known as Silicon and Synapse (games include Lost Vikings, Rock and Roll Racing, a N64 port of SC1, and SC:Ghost....uh...well ok, Chris Metzen just announced D3 to the PS3 and 4 so...), and it is for this reason that I am left disheartened and confused as to why contextual navigation has all but disappeared as a tool, or only used sparingly (the last time we saw this type of system was for WC3). There are so many fantastic reasons in the positive column that make, of all their IP's, StarCraft so in line with the use of a robust and fully developed keyboard navigation system, and because of this apparent synergy I would like to present an idea as to how to approach this. I also have a number of bugs, graphical inconsistencies, or conceptual issues that I also wanted to point out post 2.0.4 that I found along the way (that haven't been already in previous threads, such as this). Let's get started shall we?
Before I get into the specifics I would like to note that I only spent a couple of hours in total in looking over all the new patch, and coming up with the structure (along with the bugs or other oddities found).
I briefly covered this in my blog on The Economy of Design, but now that I had access to the updated UI in full I wanted to talk about how the hierarchy currently functions in real life, and allows for this kind of contextual navigation to happen with relative ease. Essentially as we look at it, there is a top level, main level, float level, and secondary and ternary sublevels of navigation menus within those three overall categories (the UI redesign team should get some kudos here for restructuring the complete mess of post 1.5 into something more concise and clean). The top level could be described as any navigation or pane that is not contextually oriented. That is to say, it functions at every level of the client, or is only at the very front end (such as the login screen). The items that accompany this are:
Two notes on this should be made:
The bracketing shows what level these systems lie in, and how the login is an autonomous and separate function. Also I should note that hotkeys are now found in menu/options/ but is an entirely separated screen, so it falls under the float category.
Coinciding with this separation, the use of the [number keys 1-6] will cycle between the menu bar items while the use of the [Alt + Tab] key will cycle between open group windows only (see below for more global options).
The next section is the main level where currently, and previously, we still have the use of our F-keys to get through quick navigation (along with the top level welcome screen, though that isn't really important, just should be noted), though they no longer can be assigned, but are instead always linked to the main level (F1-5).
Finally, and perhaps the most confusing, the float level is made up of contextual screens that function on their own as secondary level navigations, but are by their nature already either at the secondary level or further down. Note that these screens are indicated in the overall navigation scheme below. As a special note, the Create Game options have two functionalities, in arcade/custom functions and for shared replay viewing. You will see a separation in the menu below and was done to indicate this separation.
Following this hierarchy I very easily once I had looked at the entirety of the UI found an easy way to set up the keyboard navigation. When broken down, the three levels of navigation look like the following:
what it immediately apparent through these images, hotkeys aside, is that we see this kind of sublevel navigation all the time, in the structuring of websites. What also is visually apparent is that, and somewhat nicely, as a result of this hierarchy we rarely get past the ternary level of navigation, though I will touch upon a few problems I found with the sublevel navigation later.
A few notes on the above system should also be noted, in that certain global options retain their functionality. They are:
[~] Will toggle text fields as active or inactive. Default is inactive for search fields, and active for chat and login fields.
[Tab] Will cycle through tabs in groups window, or menu items with left_side orientation (example: custom games_navbar, or the top_navbar in the score screen).
[Alt + Tab] Will cycle between open chat windows. Shift works the same way (back function when added).
Orange colored buttons such as the find match always are activated by the enter key.
Similarly ok, cancel, and close are always activated by the [esc] or [ent] key. This level (regarding esc) would normally override the hotkey for the menu/, however it always seemed bizzare that the activation key was escape, so I just rebound it to F10 (a longstanding choice in Blizzard titles). There is an additional problem that I'll discuss below as well.
The [Back] key toggles between a minimized open pane, or closes it depending on the context (would minimize in for instance a joined game where the x close is replaced with a - minimize button)
That's essentially the crux of adding in a contextual navigation system, and after looking briefly at the current setup, would be very easy to include. Now the big questions to Blizzard might be "Isn't this too complex to be used effectively? What about engaging new players and developing our customer base, and not scaring them away?" At first perhaps this might look like an issue and especially if you are looking in the global sense, though you're not losing the functionality that is already there. What this does accomplish however is that for the advanced user, allows for quick and mouse-less navigation of a system you use regularly (read: pro players would greatly benefit). Additionally and perhaps more importantly as we are all different types of people, having this kind of navigation system doesn't mean that people will learn every single option. In fact I would be surprised if people used the achievements options at all, however, for those who exclusively use the competitive matchmaking function, quickly and easily parsing out [F2] + [R] + [Ent] to jump in to a game is such a nuanced, but rewarding thing (and here they use maybe 2-3 of these menus only, so there ends up being less to parse overall). It's a win win from my perspective, and something that I hope they seriously consider adding.
One final thing I just want to put out there. In keeping with all the training ideas and apm exercises, I also felt that by instantiating this system would give rise to a potential tool or training game option. This would be to have a number of navigation strings (e.g. get from point A to B via these hotkeys) that are set and that you have to execute precisely and quickly, with a number of difficulty tiers. This game does two things, it teaches or at least is one way to help with apm efficiency and speed, but also serves to teach the user the system navigation as well. Sound like an interesting tool for newer players?
So I did mention that I noticed some errors or inconsistencies, bugs, or other problems with the new system that I find perplexing that someone didn't catch in quality assurance. I'll get to those now. These are in no particular order and kind of as I wrote them down:
In the profile 'settings cog', the "copy link" option is not clear as to what it intends to impart to the end user. This is seen in a few other places, but this option copies your profile link, though I am unsure as to what it's is used for (seems client oriented in that the output of starcraft://profile/#/############## doesn't follow standard url link structuring).
I mentioned this in my blog, but I still find it problematic that in the arcade section of 'Open Games' only has a max of 30 games total. This seems far too low considering the current options, and eventual expansion of the array, especially when placed next to Valve's longstanding system that can populate over 200 open servers in less time that it takes to parse these 30 instances.
In the Replays/Multiplayer/ section, the scrollbar is bugged. When dragged the visual bar lags behind the cursor and ends up feeling like negative acceleration as you have to move your mouse further to reach the bottom of the scroll area. This needs to be reprogrammed and is likely a very easy fix from my experience.
A small thing, but you'll notice in the hierarchy that I occasionally have the racial order as PTZ and not the standard expansion order of TZP. This is because the actual menu system has this in the wrong order, where every other instantiation is the latter (yes this is nitpicky, but it is an inconsistency).
In the Profile/Achievements/ section the ternary level and beyond is visually undefined in that if you were to just look at that screen without context, you would have no idea where you were in the navigation of your client. An easy solution is to add in a breadcrumb (again, commonly used in web design) in the Identification pane (top left area that identifies the sublevel):
Victory Screen: After finishing a match, you see the new fancy victory screen. I tend to listen to my own music so I have disabled the music, so when the race victory music played at that instance I immediately looked for a way to turn that off as it seemed odd that I had disallowed music, yet, here music is. Unfortunately there is no option to disable this effect that I could find, it's just always there until it's fixed by Blizzard. Please flag this as an music source.
The new hotkeys created a problem. I rebound my camera location keys to F1-5 a long time ago, so when I first played a game with the new UI and got an army, the new army selection overrides my camera hotkey entirely (worked before army, not after). In trying to fix this I unbound it, and somehow I entirely broke my left-click drag box functionality, and could not recover it without leaving the game and starting a new one. For competitive players this seems problematic should this happen with any regularity.
As mentioned before, the [esc] key activates the menu, and I find this very problematic for one reason. If you wanted to get to the menu via keyboard but want to stay on your current pane, that is not possible in the current iteration. The above suggestion of retaining F10 solves this issue. Essentially escape has a dual function in the client (one as the 'menu activation', and one as 'back one level'), and this is very poor design.
We all are used to the standard race icons for SC2, however I should point out that the new Profile/Ladder/Grandmaster/ section (easiest example, but is for all ladder lists) uses an entirely new set of icons which look terrible. I'm not exactly sure what the intent is here, but the graphics were poor changes as they do not reflect the color scheme of each race, nor are they in line with the traditional set (left of the new icons). This is nitpicky I know, but there is no good reason to fundamentally change the icons in this instance.
Additionally, the new random icon has two items regarding its look. The addition of the question mark into one of the sides is a redundancy that seems somewhat out of place, in that a die is really the only thing necessary to impart the 'random' aesthetic (you could use the ? or dots only, but using both ? and dots seems an unnecessary redundancy). Also, the proportional design of the die itself does not mimic how it would look in a real world scenario, being overly stretched in the middle bottom area at the point of intersection between the 5 and ? sides meet (from a real world perspective it is imparts an overly stretched look).
(edit: sushiman points out in the thread that the proportions are based on a 2-point perspective approach)
the very first time I started the battle.net client, it recognized that I owned Swarm (preordered, no beta), and showed me options that I do not have in Wings (see below). On subsequent logins, these options disappeared as if the game was saying "oops, my bad!"
Hotkey panes still have the previous graphic styles of 2.1.0.0 (Wings release client) in both the left and right panes (bind hotkey, profile, etc...). While not necessarily bad this is the only place they are ever used. See differences between this and the Options/Help/Protoss Units/ section's visual identity. This entirely new UI is not 'entirely new' I guess.
In the right pane in the main screen, when you add in channels you will see a scroll bar for navigation, up to 5 as we've seen previously. Unfortunately when removing past 1 instance the window are resizes and the hr graphic element at the bottom does not move, creating a visual inconsistency. This is easily solved by adding in a temporary blank placeholder for the removed channel until the scroll function has been activated and then the item can be removed and the window properly resized.
in-pane highlighting is not consistent. The replay highlighting is distinctly less bright/saturated than other instances and this makes no sense.
There are two different button glows, as seen in the Matchmaking/ section (mode and race rows). This different 90° gradient and brigthness difference isn't necessary as there is no functional or directional necessity to separate the visual identity from other buttons of this kind.
In the login screen the buttons on the left are semi-transparent. This is the only time in the client where they are.
Select all larvae in the Menu/Options/Gameplay/ section makes you select all larvae automatically and is the default option. I do not understand why this function was created (e.g. redundant feature with no purpose) and as someone who does individually select larvae so I needed to change this.
Similarly, in Menu/Options/Gameplay/ in order to be able to select enemy units you must check the box for 'Enable Enemy Unit Selection' else you cannot select them at all. I find it rather hard to believe there is even a need for an option such as this, let alone this being the default (competitive players will be very annoyed with this). Maaaybe all-stars, but that still doesn't strike me as a pertinent selectable global option.
In create game, there is no option to create a private game when in Custom Games/Browse/. You can also create an offline game, but it is only accessible by right clicking the map inline pane. This does work normally however from Custom Games/Bookmarks/ and from Custom Games/Recently Played/.
Play as guest has disappeared. I guess you need an account now. How does this affect the starter edition functionality?
Add player and invite player to games or replays means the same things, but its nomenclature is different for some reason. There should only be one naming system here.
Stage Two and Three percussion at the start is not flagged as a musical source?
Larvae birthing sounds are not at the same dB level as the rest of the game and thusly stick out a little more than they should.
Group/chat windows do not remember my resizing choices. It always opens as the default size.
Other Curiosities
when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically.
Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
So that's pretty much what I wanted to cover. I hope that some of the things I've found here are helpful, or things that Blizzard are seriously considering in their various design/planning phases that they go through. As PC only title I really wish that companies did more of this kind of functionality as it only serves to enhance the directness and impact of the system onto the end user (that and bugs are not cool).
ah this is a long read, sc2's ui has always felt way too clunky for me lol. i think that wc3 one was simply the best, functional, quick to learn. maybe one day they will learn that change doesn't imply improvement.
The HotS option you are wondering about is the Starter Edition. It will most likely be activated on battle.net after HotS release.
Also, I guess the background patch is in fact the starter edition. I guess you can test HotS directly after release. This would also allow laddering directly after release without huge downloads. But this is just what I assume it to be... What other reason exists that they encrypt archives files labeled with HotS?
Also, you might want to look into the window where you can select players to invite, too. In the new HotS advertising video which was released today, that window didn't seem great. Sadly I don't know about its functionality in the live version.
Also, lobby still shows options that you can't edit. This is more important arcade, but it's something that needs improvement, too. =/
Blizzard actually started with console gaming. They did The Lost Vikings and Rock N' Roll Racing, 2 awesome titles that a lot of people forget about. Their roots were initially in consoles.
I do not have a custom gaming pc. I play my games on a normal end pc. I did not have any issues playing WOL in low to medium settings. For some reason, HOTS beta makes my computer hotter and laggier on low settings, forget about going to medium settings or activating physics. I can play 5 to 10 games on HOTS before the program begins to have problems, however, I can play WOL for days. I agree with you OP. this was a funny post as well.
Well done Wo1fwood, giving free QA to blizz since (insert year here)
Some of these I would never have noticed, but the hotkey bug and the music after a game ends bothered me too. I really hope they fix the music post win.
On February 21 2013 05:30 Achaia wrote: Blizzard actually started with console gaming. They did The Lost Vikings and Rock N' Roll Racing, 2 awesome titles that a lot of people forget about. Their roots were initially in consoles.
The HotS option you are wondering about is the Starter Edition. It will most likely be activated on battle.net after HotS release.
Also, I guess the background patch is in fact the starter edition. I guess you can test HotS directly after release. This would also allow laddering directly after release without huge downloads. But this is just what I assume it to be... What other reason exists that they encrypt archives files labeled with HotS?
Also, you might want to look into the window where you can select players to invite, too. In the new HotS advertising video which was released today, that window didn't seem great. Sadly I don't know about its functionality in the live version.
Also, lobby still shows options that you can't edit. This is more important arcade, but it's something that needs improvement, too. =/
The add to lobby looks exactly like the invite to party option. I don't have enough friends online at the same time to know how multiple people past 8-10 would instantiate a scroll function or not, or how that works.
Thanks on the redundant options. I probably should have been more thorough in my look at game modes, or other options of that kind. It sounds like I would find a few things.
On February 21 2013 05:30 Achaia wrote: Blizzard actually started with console gaming. They did The Lost Vikings and Rock N' Roll Racing, 2 awesome titles that a lot of people forget about. Their roots were initially in consoles.
ah, I knew I had a funny feeling when I wrote that. Thanks for the correction, I'll edit that in.
Pretty in depth analysis here. I have to say though that I see very few actual bugs. Obviously the f-key issues are a problem and there are a few interface items that he mentioned which are pretty legitimate. Most of the other items though just appear to be personal preference. I personally love the new UI and think it's much easier to navigate than 1.5 (granted he did give credit to the team for not screwing up worse than that). Either way, it's an impressive post, wish more OPs on TL were this well structured and presented.
I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
A lot of those are personal preference and not bugs or issues. Others that legitimately are bugs (such as the hotkeys) need to be posted in the bug report forums if they're to have any hope of getting fixed eventually.
Very nice read. Bnet needs some serious re-working, not just in the UI and how it looks. I've honestly never been able to play custom games. I played WC3 for a long time and 90% of that were custom games. Now you can only play popular TDs and even in their TOP10 most popular list, I could not find a game to play.
I guess one really important feature would be lobby manual browsing...
Anyways great post, really well written and organized.
There's this thing in software development that we call "bikeshedding".
It's based on an insight from a 1960s book on management, in which the author said that if you go to your board of directors with plans for a nuclear power plant, they're going to say “Well, you're the expert” and approve them. If you go to them with plans for a bikeshed, they're going to spend all day arguing about what colour you should paint it. Because unlike nuclear power plants, everyone thinks they understand bikesheds and want to get their two cents in.
I'm a programmer. I work with incredibly talented, professional graphical and UX designers on a daily basis. This is why they they hate us.
Because we look over the design they poured weeks into and start making trivial suggestions. They have to go back over that entire week and justify every decision they made, and explain to us that all the things we're suggesting are things they tried and threw out. Maybe they tried dozens of different menu configurations and interaction models, subjected them to usability testing and went with the one that scored best on all the axes they were interested in? Maybe the distorted dice logo was more recogniseable when scaled down to the smallest size than the perfectly symmetrical one? Maybe one of the designs was rushed because hey, they were only given a limited amount of time to design a dozen screens. Too bad, we're not going to be happy until they've justified all those decisions all over again.
Then we take their designs and subject them to the constraints of software development. The pixel perfection that they worked on is sacrificed because we have to get a product out by a deadline. Some of their screens need to be redesigned because the back-end isn't quite flexible enough to serve what they need. Work on a whole raft of look and feel bugs is postponed because there are dozens of more important things that need to be developed at the time.
And then we release the software, and the designers cringe waiting for the customers to start the same process all over.
On February 21 2013 06:02 derpface wrote: I bet your rl job is a auditor...
Thats what I was thinking- No one could even notice half the things he mentioned unless they critisized things this heavily on a regular basis. The new UI is nice, clean and easy for me to use. I see no problem with it. You are being to critical in my opinion.
That is some intense and attentive scrutiny. However, no matter how long one spends looking at the hood of the car one is never going to understand why it's shaped a little weird unless one can take a look at the engine.
Personally, I think they did a fine job with the new UI.
On February 21 2013 07:13 carlfish wrote: There's this thing in software development that we call "bikeshedding".
It's based on an insight from a 1960s book on management, in which the author said that if you go to your board of directors with plans for a nuclear power plant, they're going to say “Well, you're the expert” and approve them. If you go to them with plans for a bikeshed, they're going to spend all day arguing about what colour you should paint it. Because unlike nuclear power plants, everyone thinks they understand bikesheds and want to get their two cents in.
I'm a programmer. I work with incredibly talented, professional graphical and UX designers on a daily basis. This is why they they hate us.
Because we look over the design they poured weeks into and start making trivial suggestions. They have to go back over that entire week and justify every decision they made, and explain to us that all the things we're suggesting are things they tried and threw out. Maybe they tried dozens of different menu configurations and interaction models, subjected them to usability testing and went with the one that scored best on all the axes they were interested in? Maybe the distorted dice logo was more recogniseable when scaled down to the smallest size than the perfectly symmetrical one? Maybe one of the designs was rushed because hey, they were only given a limited amount of time to design a dozen screens. Too bad, we're not going to be happy until they've justified all those decisions all over again.
Then we take their designs and subject them to the constraints of software development. The pixel perfection that they worked on is sacrificed because we have to get a product out by a deadline. Some of their screens need to be redesigned because the back-end isn't quite flexible enough to serve what they need. Work on a whole raft of look and feel bugs is postponed because there are dozens of more important things that need to be developed at the time.
And then we release the software, and the designers cringe waiting for the customers to start the same process all over.
It must totally suck for a have to release something you know is going to be picked apart by customers. I hate doing work that I know is going to be shredded by my clients, even if it was the best job we could do with the time we had. But one thing I have learned is everyone thinks they could have done it better after the results come in.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Keyboards are slowly going from the station of primary input device to a special purpose one. It's not just because of the influence of console gaming. It's also due to smart phones, tablets, and touch screen monitors for PCs and laptops.
I'm a programmer, and I love to be able to do all of my work from a keyboard without touching the mouse. I use vi specifically so that I can navigate around a document without having to use the mouse. But I also realize that I'm not the norm when it comes to computer users. For most people, just scrolling with the mouse makes more sense for the kind of tasks they routinely do. And when I play video games, I'm in that same boat with them.
Mouse based navigation for the menus is a sufficient and suitable interface. Making sure everything has a keyboard short cut for menu navigation is overkill, and I would rather have Blizzard's development resources sunk elsewhere.
On February 21 2013 07:23 Plansix wrote: It must totally suck for a have to release something you know is going to be picked apart by customers. I hate doing work that I know is going to be shredded by my clients, even if it was the best job we could do with the time we had. But one thing I have learned is everyone thinks they could have done it better after the results come in.
It's also a simple fact of life that no creative work is ever really finished. Everybody who has ever built something would, if they took the time to go back over it again, find an almost uncountable number of flaws that they wished they could fix. And when you give your work to the public you're just outsourcing that process to thousands of people who don't even understand the process that got the work to the place it did when you released it.
On February 21 2013 06:02 derpface wrote: I bet your rl job is a auditor...
actually, I'm a contemporary classical composer.
Well, I find your critic of the new UI to be overly critical, nit picky and presumptuous. You assume a lot with little expertise on the subject and point to small details that have little baring on the over all usability of the system, while taking little time to discuss the improvements in the UI.
More importantly, I am a paralegal who drafts legal documents, contracts and does legal research. How seriously would you take my criticism of your latest musical work if I titled it “Wo1fwood’s Sonata, Not Written for Concert Halls”?
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
I think I saw one, let me just find a link.
Oh wait, it's in. the. fucking. op. Sorry, something about not being able to see the forest because of all the trees.
The reason the keyboard is not used for navigation is because of the ability to type into chat windows. Not having the input box "hot" to type in and then typing would result in moving around the UI. Non hardcore users would be easily confused.
Very impressive, I've thought about a few of this things before but never as good as the stuff shown in the OP. Its just remarkable, nice work OP. Blizzard truly needs to work on this; I thought it was kind of OK before and not that big of a deal, but after having a closer look at the current state of things I think its very sad for such a company like Blizzard to present a product with so many flaws.
Stuff like this reminds me of an epic facepalm moment I had when watching last Blizzcon, they were happily showing the "new cool and exciting HOTS units and its abilities" and the way they did it was such a fail, the videos were horrendous pieces of work, anybody could've done a better job; seriously, it looked like they made those videos the night before the event not to mention the retarded idea of the unreal scenarios where the units were engaging battles...I couldn't believe it, it was utterly dumb, such a waste of time and money.
On February 21 2013 07:13 carlfish wrote: There's this thing in software development that we call "bikeshedding".
It's based on an insight from a 1960s book on management, in which the author said that if you go to your board of directors with plans for a nuclear power plant, they're going to say “Well, you're the expert” and approve them. If you go to them with plans for a bikeshed, they're going to spend all day arguing about what colour you should paint it. Because unlike nuclear power plants, everyone thinks they understand bikesheds and want to get their two cents in.
I'm a programmer. I work with incredibly talented, professional graphical and UX designers on a daily basis. This is why they they hate us.
Because we look over the design they poured weeks into and start making trivial suggestions. They have to go back over that entire week and justify every decision they made, and explain to us that all the things we're suggesting are things they tried and threw out. Maybe they tried dozens of different menu configurations and interaction models, subjected them to usability testing and went with the one that scored best on all the axes they were interested in? Maybe the distorted dice logo was more recogniseable when scaled down to the smallest size than the perfectly symmetrical one? Maybe one of the designs was rushed because hey, they were only given a limited amount of time to design a dozen screens. Too bad, we're not going to be happy until they've justified all those decisions all over again.
Then we take their designs and subject them to the constraints of software development. The pixel perfection that they worked on is sacrificed because we have to get a product out by a deadline. Some of their screens need to be redesigned because the back-end isn't quite flexible enough to serve what they need. Work on a whole raft of look and feel bugs is postponed because there are dozens of more important things that need to be developed at the time.
And then we release the software, and the designers cringe waiting for the customers to start the same process all over.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Most casino dies adhere to high standards, for Blizzard's die it doesn't have "even" surfaces.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
The pic is in the OP. Also, when did we care that art in a UI was not perfect in every way? I mean, its an icon and when did we start caring about those on this level.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Most casino dies adhere to high standards, for Blizzard's die it doesn't have "even" surfaces.
By distorting the image slightly to increase the size of the visible facets, the icon is more recognisable as a die when scaled down.
On February 21 2013 07:23 Plansix wrote: It must totally suck for a have to release something you know is going to be picked apart by customers. I hate doing work that I know is going to be shredded by my clients, even if it was the best job we could do with the time we had. But one thing I have learned is everyone thinks they could have done it better after the results come in.
It's also a simple fact of life that no creative work is ever really finished. Everybody who has ever built something would, if they took the time to go back over it again, find an almost uncountable number of flaws that they wished they could fix. And when you give your work to the public you're just outsourcing that process to thousands of people who don't even understand the process that got the work to the place it did when you released it.
Its so true. I always want to polish my motions and pleadings before we submit them to the court, but we due dates and we can't blow them off. Pleadings arn't art, but I treat them like it(because I like to win). However, even in law, people don't nitpick to this level unless your at the S.C. and even they don't care about uneven lines.
While it looks like you put a lot of time and effort into this, it's just a frontend for the game itself. It's the aesthetic choice of the designer, and as such, it can't really be "wrong" for PC. This is how Blizzard wants it to look/act, this is how it will look and act.
As far as the bugs and glitches are concerned, just give it some QA time.
I don't get the thing about the icons. I think they look a lot better than before (although for those of us who plays random, I can confirm that it is NOT asymmetrical. I call it terrandom now)
Completely agree with the rest, unfortunately bnet 2.0 will require so much work I don't think they will ever be able to make it good..they can only tweak it a little bit, like they have in hots.
On February 21 2013 07:23 Plansix wrote: It must totally suck for a have to release something you know is going to be picked apart by customers. I hate doing work that I know is going to be shredded by my clients, even if it was the best job we could do with the time we had. But one thing I have learned is everyone thinks they could have done it better after the results come in.
As a designer, it's par for the course. You learn to have a thick skin. It's why design school spends so much time on critique, because that becomes half the job. It's also why there's an art to arguing for design ideas, since most people view them as subjective, when most of the time they're anything but.
On February 21 2013 06:43 MVega wrote: A lot of those are personal preference and not bugs or issues. Others that legitimately are bugs (such as the hotkeys) need to be posted in the bug report forums if they're to have any hope of getting fixed eventually.
I'll address what some people are classifying as 'preferrential' on my part:
Inconsistencies are not bugs for sure, but they still are inconsistencies within the client. I will admit that there is a bit of preference in what I say (how can I not), but that said however, there is a distinct difference between the inconsistencies that a designer sees, and what a general end-user will think is just fine or overly nitpicky (or labeled preferential).
An example of this is the highlight inconsistency in the replays section. As someone who designs things, this discrepancy does not make sense because there is no underlying reason that one type of selection_highlight is different than another (blizzard does have a 2 tiered system were there is a hover and selected difference, which is important). Ask yourself the question, "why are replays highlighted differently? Whats the purpose?" By making this design choice Blizzard is very subtly saying "hey, this is important (or less important)!" and has a distinctly different function, when clearly, it does not.
Now to the average end-user this difference is so subtle that they will likely classify it as 'preferential', and there is some truth to that idea, in that it is a very subtle change that doesn't really impact the client operation. Nevertheless, you cannot deny that the above differences still have no functional reason to exist and is therefore inconsistent from a design perspective.
So, are there some preferences here in the inconsistencies I mentioned? Out of the 24 total, I would say that about 1-3 of them are more grey and perhaps preferential, but every other item (aside from 2 that I would need more info on) is rooted in some design choice that has some kind of issue or problem behind it.
This is also not a subtly derogatory remark either on my part, I hope to impart that designers see things differently, the way that anyone with advanced knowledge on a subject sees things differently than the general populous. Think of how Beethoven would hear music versus one of your siblings or parents? Err... Maybe I should have used the word perceive...
when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically.
Firstly this doesn't always work fluidly; lets say you are researching +1 weapons at a Forge, and your screen shows the Forge in the top right corner, but barely visible. When you click on the upgrade, it will just highlight the Forge, but not center it on the screen. This is kind of annoying because as you've stated if the building/item on the production tab is clicked when it's "owner" building is off screen, yet it will center it.
Secondly; this is incredibly useful and I'm glad they put it in (despite the above inconsistency) as it makes displaying something that is being produced a lot easier when casting/observing
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Most casino dies adhere to high standards, for Blizzard's die it doesn't have "even" surfaces.
By distorting the image slightly to increase the size of the visible facets, the icon is more recognisable as a die when scaled down.
Unless you have a picture of an undistorted Blizzard die, you have nothing to compare to and you're just making conjecture.
On February 21 2013 06:02 derpface wrote: I bet your rl job is a auditor...
Thats what I was thinking- No one could even notice half the things he mentioned unless they critisized things this heavily on a regular basis. The new UI is nice, clean and easy for me to use. I see no problem with it. You are being to critical in my opinion.
so your argument is they should invest millions of dollars in a game and then leave bad design elements in because (in 1 persons opinion) its not worth the effort to fix?
this isnt the first time blizzard has failed at simple shape drawing in the SC2 UI, this guy is basically doing their QA departments job for them.
On February 21 2013 07:41 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Skimming through and seeing you bitch about the size of the dice icon...I knew I didn't need to bother reading the whole pretentious piece. Good god.
you think the design team didnt have a meeting to decide on icon choice/colour/size?
hes being no more pretentious than any designer would be.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Most casino dies adhere to high standards, for Blizzard's die it doesn't have "even" surfaces.
By distorting the image slightly to increase the size of the visible facets, the icon is more recognisable as a die when scaled down.
Unless you have a picture of an undistorted Blizzard die, you have nothing to compare to and you're just making conjecture.
My conjecture as to why it's drawn the way it is, is equally valid as any other. Unless we were actually in the room when it was designed and understood the trade-offs involved, we don't know.
Which is kind of my point.
It's a stupid thing to even care about. Cartoon characters don't have the proportions of real people. Neither do Barbie dolls. Trash cans don't bulge at the sides when you put something in them, but that was an incredibly successful visual metaphor on the original Macintosh. Icons are supposed to represent things, not depict them, and blasting them for not being sufficiently "realistic" is a complete waste of time.
Hey guys, I briefly glanced through the thread and didn't see anyone mention this (I apologize if anyone did). I was playing a team game last night and one of the opponents paused the game and ragequit. Then, when the game was unpaused none of the remaining players could control their units (mouse or hotkeys), nor could they even scroll the screen. This happened 3 times, with 2 different ragequitters. Is this a bug or a hack?
On February 21 2013 08:14 TheAnswerIsZero wrote: Possible Bug(?):
Hey guys, I briefly glanced through the thread and didn't see anyone mention this (I apologize if anyone did). I was playing a team game last night and one of the opponents paused the game and ragequit. Then, when the game was unpaused none of the remaining players could control their units (mouse or hotkeys), nor could they even scroll the screen. This happened 3 times, with 2 different ragequitters. Is this a bug or a hack?
Wrong thread. Bugs here should be limited to battle.net ui, not ingame.
Had a good laugh at that, thanks for posting your findings again. It is always entertaining if people go overly critically about something. Personally liked the dice section the most, especially since I like the scaled version and think the designer made the perfect decision there.
Uhm. You do realise that keyboard navigation has little to no real application in any of the situations you described? In fact, in a game like Starcraft 2 (where the keys are linked to various actions) it might actually DETRACT from the experience to have other keys enabled. Not to mention the possibility of what we in WoW called chatboxing which is your chat bar taking actions you intended the game to have, or vice versa.
You're nitpicking. Far, far too much. There is no need for a more fluid interface when the design of Battlenet 2.0.4 is to keep the player in the interface more often!!
I hate it when people who can't analyse things pretend they can.
Some of this stuff is just dumb, overall I like the idea behind what you did and some things would be better if tweaked, but a lot of this was just nit picky.
Originally, i thought you to be some kind of OCD super critic. I also did not refering to a PC, as I thought you wanted sc2 to be windows exclusive (I play on a mac).
Then I gave you the benefit of the doubt and read threw both blogs.
And I agree with you. would help to streamline things. The shortcut keys were something I missed form my WC3 days.
The new hotkeys created a problem. I rebound my camera location keys to F1-5 a long time ago, so when I first played a game with the new UI and got an army, the new army selection overrides my camera hotkey entirely (worked before army, not after). In trying to fix this I unbound it, and somehow I entirely broke my left-click drag box functionality, and could not recover it without leaving the game and starting a new one. For competitive players this seems problematic should this happen with any regularity.
I had the same rebind active, and when I logged in it gave me a big warning screen saying that I had hotkey conflicts with the new HotS hotkey configuration. It gave me the option to fix it or to ignore. So, I don't really see this as a problem since it actively prevented me from logging on and warned me that this was a problem.
You think Blizzard would read these and fucking hire... If Blizzard hired even 3 of the coders/think tankers on this fucking website (I bet a lot of them would if given the chance) the game and their future games would be so much better technically and visually.
I've been in awe of Blizzard's shocking incompetence with Battle.Net 2.0. It's been a tragic failure since day one... A massive pile of shit that has never been acceptable to me. It's an actual downgrade from Battle.Net 1.0
I don't really know if I (or the vast majority of people playing this game) really care about this sort of functionality. I get the impression a lot of support here is coming from people who didn't actually read OP and are just eager to further critique Blizzard.
All I'd really like is better keyboard support for navigating between chats and stuff, since that's when I actually have both hands on the keyboard. Otherwise I'd probably just click stuff 99% of the time anyways. Navigating the SC2 UI isn't like editing code. I don't need keyboard shortcuts to race between every obscure UI page at high speed.
Mostly things that I wouldn't notice if someone like you didn't point them out, but when you think about it, there's very little reason not to touch these things up. Another great post
lol at the dice.....who cares if the question mark is an overkill? Stop overanalyzing stuff man. Its blizz, let them do what they want. Now you are going to complain about the color of the dice?
EDIT: And its not symmetrical, you are so funny. Do you really think these are necessary? Oh ok, maybe add 2 more millimeters and change the angle to 5 degree to make it nice. Who cares...
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Did you even read the OP? lol
There's a pic and caption specifically about this in there.
I think you are overly critical aswell. I know it's not perfect, it has flaws but I don't mind and frankly I don't see half of the things you posted, nor they bug me. I won't bother with deconstruction the whole thing piece by piece I won't read it and double check everything. It's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but there is at least one thing wrong/not true which I've just picked up while only glancing through it.
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [*]The new hotkeys created a problem. I rebound my camera location keys to F1-5 a long time ago, so when I first played a game with the new UI and got an army, the new army selection overrides my camera hotkey entirely (worked before army, not after). In trying to fix this I unbound it, and somehow I entirely broke my left-click drag box functionality, and could not recover it without leaving the game and starting a new one. For competitive players this seems problematic should this happen with any regularity.
I don't get it, the very first thing game did today when I've logged in, even before I saw any of the UI big message popped up and screamed THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH YOUR KEYBINDS, CLICK HERE TO FIX IT. How did you come up with this, I don't know....
On February 21 2013 10:03 AnomalySC2 wrote: I've never understood the bnet whining. The GAME is what matters most.
An interface is part of the game experience.
Imagine trying to play a board game but the manual is written in random order. Alright, poor analogy, but you get the point.
It's part of the experience sure, but the real point of SC2 is the gameplay itself. I mean, people have been attacking bnet 2.0 ever since WoL beta and it has always left me scratching my head. I bought the game to play the SP and enjoy intense MP matches, not play around with the menus...or w/e people were wanting out of it all LOL. The ladder works, the custom games menu works, what is there is complain about, really?
And yeah that analogy didn't make any sense at all xD
On February 21 2013 10:47 Jochan wrote: I think you are overly critical aswell. I know it's not perfect, it has flaws but I don't mind and frankly I don't see half of the things you posted, nor they bug me. I won't bother with deconstruction the whole thing piece by piece I won't read it and double check everything. It's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but there is at least one thing wrong/not true which I've just picked up while only glancing through it.
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [*]The new hotkeys created a problem. I rebound my camera location keys to F1-5 a long time ago, so when I first played a game with the new UI and got an army, the new army selection overrides my camera hotkey entirely (worked before army, not after). In trying to fix this I unbound it, and somehow I entirely broke my left-click drag box functionality, and could not recover it without leaving the game and starting a new one. For competitive players this seems problematic should this happen with any regularity.
I don't get it, the very first thing game did today when I've logged in, even before I saw any of the UI big message popped up and screamed THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH YOUR KEYBINDS, CLICK HERE TO FIX IT. How did you come up with this, I don't know....
Agree with this post. The new interface is waaaay better that the old one. You make good points, but most are of such little importance to 99% of the people that they aren't even worth mentioning.
By the way, clicking the buttons on the production tabs is a new feature that was announced in one of the latest Blizz vids, and it's incredibly useful for casters. Calling it an "oddity" is absurd.
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Most casino dies adhere to high standards, for Blizzard's die it doesn't have "even" surfaces.
By distorting the image slightly to increase the size of the visible facets, the icon is more recognisable as a die when scaled down.
Unless you have a picture of an undistorted Blizzard die, you have nothing to compare to and you're just making conjecture.
I think the stretched die looks better than the isometric one. Allows for a bigger face to display the question mark, giving a better indication of "random".
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Did you even read the OP? lol
There's a pic and caption specifically about this in there.
It's basic 2-point perspective, the OP complaining that it's distorted isometric is absurd.
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [list][*]In the profile 'settings cog', the "copy link" option is not clear as to what it intends to impart to the end user. This is seen in a few other places, but this option copies your profile link, though I am unsure as to what it's is used for (seems client oriented in that the output of starcraft://profile/#/############## doesn't follow standard url link structuring).
You don't understanding something doesn't make something a bug, or an incosistency. It's clear that a profile link is something that is used to link to your profile. And how do you open a link? You put it into the navigation bar in any web-browser or the folder navigation bar in windows. SAME AS EVERY OTHER LINK!
It's use is fairly simple. For example; i want to show some profile to a TL member. I don't know the profile character number, and i added him from my match history. I just give him the profile link, and BAM, he can access his profile.
Also, about standard url link structuring:
What the hell? a normal url for a profile page would be along the lines of:
On February 21 2013 06:04 StarBrift wrote: I find it suprisingly hillarious that the random icon is a die that if used in real life would not actually give the user a random result because it's not symmetrical.
Please explain. I was under the impression that a die gives you a random result.
A die with uneven surfaces will not have 1/6 probability for each side, there will be a tendency to favor other sides more than others and depending on the severity of the deformity on the die it may not even land on certain sides.
Oh does the random icon die have uneven surfaces? Can someone post a pic?
Did you even read the OP? lol
There's a pic and caption specifically about this in there.
It's basic 2-point perspective, the OP complaining that it's distorted isometric is absurd.
ah, thank you for pointing that out. my wording on that was rather poor in retrospect.
On February 21 2013 10:41 dynwar7 wrote: lol at the dice.....who cares if the question mark is an overkill? Stop overanalyzing stuff man. Its blizz, let them do what they want. Now you are going to complain about the color of the dice?
EDIT: And its not symmetrical, you are so funny. Do you really think these are necessary? Oh ok, maybe add 2 more millimeters and change the angle to 5 degree to make it nice. Who cares...
You my friend, are the kind of tool that propagate further stupidity from Blizzard
If people spend more time playing than staring at the in game menu.. they might actually improve more.. :S Don't see how any of these are in anyway affecting the game.
On February 21 2013 10:03 AnomalySC2 wrote: I've never understood the bnet whining. The GAME is what matters most.
An interface is part of the game experience.
Imagine trying to play a board game but the manual is written in random order. Alright, poor analogy, but you get the point.
It's part of the experience sure, but the real point of SC2 is the gameplay itself. I mean, people have been attacking bnet 2.0 ever since WoL beta and it has always left me scratching my head. I bought the game to play the SP and enjoy intense MP matches, not play around with the menus...or w/e people were wanting out of it all LOL. The ladder works, the custom games menu works, what is there is complain about, really?
And yeah that analogy didn't make any sense at all xD
I'd like to see see links to where you posted any of these bugs on Blizzard's beta bug report forums (one per topic).
See, I complain like this too, but I do it constructively (usually - I rage at their QA sometimes too). I have 30+ active threads for this WoW PTR patch alone, and 28 of those bugs are fixed in the latest build. I have lists and lists of hundreds of bugs that I submit each patch, and most of them are fixed. I have complained frequently in the past on those forums about the speed of the fixes being slow, and this patch cycle it has been far better. They're actively trying to improve, at least in my case.
I really hope you posted these because if you didn't, one of the main things you're proving is that you could have helped make SC2 a better game but thought it was better to complain about how terrible of a company that Blizzard is.
Sure, it reflects quite poorly on their QA department that they missed some of the more obvious things you mentioned, but the point of having a beta is to find the more obscure bugs.
On February 21 2013 15:05 i)awn wrote: I'm not sure why Blizzard had not hired you yet.
Because given time and technical constraints maybe he couldn't do any better? It's easy to sit back seeing the finished product and nitpick, but you're not privy to the design decisions, discussions, prototypes, deadlines and engine that were needed and used to get to the final result. Ignore the realities of software development at your peril.
Could things be improved? Sure. The OP has pointed out some things. Does this thread need to be on TL? No. If he wants Blizz to see it, post it to them. Otherwise this just becomes a thread for people who like hating on Blizz to get their fix.
This post is proof you can never satisfy everyone, no matter how hard you try.
Great post in structure and analysis nonetheless, but the new UI, even with its little faults and annoyances, is light years better than the two previous iterations.
On February 21 2013 15:05 i)awn wrote: I'm not sure why Blizzard had not hired you yet.
Because given time and technical constraints maybe he couldn't do any better? It's easy to sit back seeing the finished product and nitpick, but you're not privy to the design decisions, discussions, prototypes, deadlines and engine that were needed and used to get to the final result. Ignore the realities of software development at your peril.
Could things be improved? Sure. The OP has pointed out some things. Does this thread need to be on TL? No. If he wants Blizz to see it, post it to them. Otherwise this just becomes a thread for people who like hating on Blizz to get their fix.
Technical constraints? This is design fail and pure lack of direction and planning on part of Blizzard.
There is nothing constricting bnet 2.0 than Blizzard themselves.
You going to tell me that lan isn't possible in current technology next?
On February 21 2013 16:49 Eviscerador wrote: This post is proof you can never satisfy everyone, no matter how hard you try.
Great post in structure and analysis nonetheless, but the new UI, even with its little faults and annoyances, is light years better than the two previous iterations.
but this is not because this one is good, the others were just clearly made by someone how made console uis before. there is still so much room for improvement...
this is a great OP, i think people are just jumping to the conclusion that this is all blizzard hating. Criticism is not the same thing as anger. All of these things are good improvements and by getting them out there blizzard has a chance to see some of the things that can improve things for the community. Now, I'm sure some of these have already been brought up and either rationalized or simply put as low priority, but there's nothing wrong with mentioning it. Personally I love seeing these UI changes that are better fitting the target audience. The new UI is great and these (among other) improvements will only make it better
I will be honest, that was too long for me, especially because I am not fundamentally interested in UI questions.
However, this does not mean that I do not appreciate the work you have done. Thank you for stating your opinion in such a clear way (well, I didn't read all of it, but I skimmed) and for furthering the discussion.
umm wow this was DEEP, amazing read and really intriguing info! Thank you so much for taking the time to write this really super detailed post, took me awhile to read but wow, I totally agree with this and with they would use like the old Broodwar layout :-]
Synthesizing what any starcraft veteran has known faulty in the last few patches and today, and going even further in design irregularities, wo1fwood delivers! Man, and that analysis is right on. The console generation/console porting of UI design has marginalized what should be the shining example of where PC gaming can shine. Instead of seeking greater keyboard navigation and simplification (Esc key shortcomings particularly), they make it so that mouse is the only easy way to do many tasks. I have no hopes of this being implemented past 6 months of expansion (given their intractability with the original Battle.net 2.0 complaints). Maybe their design team can listen and prepare some new directions.
On February 21 2013 05:24 Aunvilgod wrote: I really do like the new interface much better than the previous one.
The previous one was literally the worst interface I have ever seen in any game ever. So yeah it's better, but OP is still right, it's a console games UI for a PC game. For the most part it's just a windows taskbar combined with your average halo ui...
Ever wonder why there are so many UI inconsistencies, e.g. why the dialog box to confirm deleting a replay is completely different in style to the dialog box for removing a friend? Or why the right-click menu in the custom games list is clearly different in style to the right-click menu on the replay page? Or why the lists on these pages have completely different styles?
I believe I've figured it out. It's because the tools they've used to make SC2 do not have standardized UI templates. It seems that they can't click a button that opens a template for a generic-right click menu. Instead, they manually design a right-click menu each time it's needed, thus leading to inconsistencies.
This appears to be the only way to explain why there are differences in the right-click menus in the custom game and replay pages, i.e. in the latter the borders are tight, in the other it's not, and in the latter the text is not bold, in the other it is. And there are many other examples.
Keep in mind that SC2's team is quite small and interface is far from their primary objective right now. These things might get fixed in the future, but as of now I think they've done a very good job. I am your average user and I didn't even register those inconsistencies and bugs, so it's not that big of a deal. Very well written post though.
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [list][*]In the profile 'settings cog', the "copy link" option is not clear as to what it intends to impart to the end user. This is seen in a few other places, but this option copies your profile link, though I am unsure as to what it's is used for (seems client oriented in that the output of starcraft://profile/#/############## doesn't follow standard url link structuring).
You don't understanding something doesn't make something a bug, or an incosistency. It's clear that a profile link is something that is used to link to your profile. And how do you open a link? You put it into the navigation bar in any web-browser or the folder navigation bar in windows. SAME AS EVERY OTHER LINK!
It's use is fairly simple. For example; i want to show some profile to a TL member. I don't know the profile character number, and i added him from my match history. I just give him the profile link, and BAM, he can access his profile.
Also, about standard url link structuring:
What the hell? a normal url for a profile page would be along the lines of:
I don't see any. Of course the protocol is starcraft (starcraft://), since it launches for sc2 client.
Calm down
You are correct, but no need to sound that way.
The starcraft-URL does follow the standard. Presumably it opens the SC2 client and navigates to the profile if clicked.
A lot of programs use URLs like this. On top of my head:
magnet: - Opens a bittorrent program and starts downloading the specified torrent spotify: - Opens the specified playlist/album/artist/song in the spotify client xfire: - Used to join servers in games
Great thread, hope the OP will give this to blizzard.
But don't be too hard, they made progress, and creating a game is harder than some of the players could think. Don't want to always blame them for everything, they gave to us a really good RTS
One thing I would like to add that has bothered me is that in the observer UI, the order of the players in the resource/supply bar to the top right is not always the same as in the other UI tabs to the left (e.g. production/units tab). I find this mildly confusing when regularly comparing supply/bank and unit compositon for example.
It seems to be a rare inconsistency, not sure how to reproduce it since I can't quite figure out what the UI sorts by (maybe color?).
On February 21 2013 21:14 Dghelneshi wrote: Great post!
One thing I would like to add that has bothered me is that in the observer UI, the order of the players in the resource/supply bar to the top right is not always the same as in the other UI tabs to the left (e.g. production/units tab). I find this mildly confusing when regularly comparing supply/bank and unit compositon for example.
It seems to be a rare inconsistency, not sure how to reproduce it since I can't quite figure out what the UI sorts by (maybe color?).
Don't know for Wol 2.0.4, but in hots we will have an option to customize the obs interface, so maybe we could change this.
I was about to read this, but scrolling I saw that joke about the dice, and someone that doesn't know what perspective is has no moral right to criticize anything. That alone tells the story about the extreme absurd nitpicking from the author. I hope someone makes a post about real UI problems...
On February 21 2013 18:39 paralleluniverse wrote: Ever wonder why there are so many UI inconsistencies, e.g. why the dialog box to confirm deleting a replay is completely different in style to the dialog box for removing a friend? Or why the right-click menu in the custom games list is clearly different in style to the right-click menu on the replay page? Or why the lists on these pages have completely different styles?
I believe I've figured it out. It's because the tools they've used to make SC2 do not have standardized UI templates. It seems that they can't click a button that opens a template for a generic-right click menu. Instead, they manually design a right-click menu each time it's needed, thus leading to inconsistencies.
This appears to be the only way to explain why there are differences in the right-click menus in the custom game and replay pages, i.e. in the latter the borders are tight, in the other it's not, and in the latter the text is not bold, in the other it is. And there are many other examples.
oh that's an interesting thought. Also I have your thread linked in the OP if you missed it.
To everyone thinking that I'm unequivocally hating on Blizzard and hate their UI, that is not my intent at all. My post hoped to offer some rather detailed constructive criticism on the new UI which should not be taken as a "this fucking sucks, fix it." The 2.0.4 UI is a big step in the right direction (I subtly said so in the OP), but just because it's a large improvement, doesn't mean that its free of flaws or shortcomings. In order for progress to happen when we want it to we must be looking critically at things.
On February 21 2013 21:56 Cheerio wrote: this is one of the most useless well written threads on TL
Agreed in everyway. This is like a full blow review of the Dead Space 3 menus or the UI for Streefighter 4. Shakespeare wrote a play about this, “Much ado about Nothing”.
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [list][*]In the profile 'settings cog', the "copy link" option is not clear as to what it intends to impart to the end user. This is seen in a few other places, but this option copies your profile link, though I am unsure as to what it's is used for (seems client oriented in that the output of starcraft://profile/#/############## doesn't follow standard url link structuring).
You don't understanding something doesn't make something a bug, or an incosistency. It's clear that a profile link is something that is used to link to your profile. And how do you open a link? You put it into the navigation bar in any web-browser or the folder navigation bar in windows. SAME AS EVERY OTHER LINK!
It's use is fairly simple. For example; i want to show some profile to a TL member. I don't know the profile character number, and i added him from my match history. I just give him the profile link, and BAM, he can access his profile.
Also, about standard url link structuring:
What the hell? a normal url for a profile page would be along the lines of:
I don't see any. Of course the protocol is starcraft (starcraft://), since it launches for sc2 client.
Calm down
You are correct, but no need to sound that way.
The starcraft-URL does follow the standard. Presumably it opens the SC2 client and navigates to the profile if clicked.
A lot of programs use URLs like this. On top of my head:
magnet: - Opens a bittorrent program and starts downloading the specified torrent spotify: - Opens the specified playlist/album/artist/song in the spotify client xfire: - Used to join servers in games
Yeah, sorry, maybe i sounded a bit too rude in that post
I just find it strange to always blame blizzard for every single feature they add to the game, i mean, they worked really hard for this patch and we are never happy!
On February 21 2013 21:45 fr0d0b0ls0n wrote: I was about to read this, but scrolling I saw that joke about the dice, and someone that doesn't know what perspective is has no moral right to criticize anything. That alone tells the story about the extreme absurd nitpicking from the author. I hope someone makes a post about real UI problems...
I was really hoping this was going to be a comprehensive critique of the UI, similar to what was done (by OP or somebody else?) to the original battle.net UI.
While some points OP makes are good (keyboard nav would be sweet, consistency is obviously desirable,) the points he is wrong about are so cringe-worthy that it undermines the whole piece. The dice was obviously a big one, but not recognizing two point perspective (which is more realistic than isometric, not less,) wasn't the worst part; it was complaining that an icon was "redundant" by being both a dice and having a question mark.
An icon is supposed to represent a single idea, and both the question mark and the dice point to that idea. The purpose of an icon is to beat you over the head with an idea so it is patently obvious at first glance- it is nearly impossible to be too "redundant." Even if it were, the dice is not. It conveys the idea perfectly.
I also disagree about the race icons being worse than the old, "colored" ones. The old icons look childish next to the new ones.
Finally, the last points, about clicking a production tab, and "stealing" YABOT... you have to be kidding me. Both of these things are amazing.
On February 21 2013 22:07 yyfpulls wrote: So much nitpicking, I think the UI is fine. And who is even going to bother using all those hotkeys anyways? No one cares about Menu APM sorry to say.
Then you never played WC3. For us Warcraft players, we were in heaven and we didn't even know it. How do you take so many steps backwards from a game released in 2002?
On February 21 2013 05:04 wo1fwood wrote: [list][*]In the profile 'settings cog', the "copy link" option is not clear as to what it intends to impart to the end user. This is seen in a few other places, but this option copies your profile link, though I am unsure as to what it's is used for (seems client oriented in that the output of starcraft://profile/#/############## doesn't follow standard url link structuring).
You don't understanding something doesn't make something a bug, or an incosistency. It's clear that a profile link is something that is used to link to your profile. And how do you open a link? You put it into the navigation bar in any web-browser or the folder navigation bar in windows. SAME AS EVERY OTHER LINK!
It's use is fairly simple. For example; i want to show some profile to a TL member. I don't know the profile character number, and i added him from my match history. I just give him the profile link, and BAM, he can access his profile.
Also, about standard url link structuring:
What the hell? a normal url for a profile page would be along the lines of:
I don't see any. Of course the protocol is starcraft (starcraft://), since it launches for sc2 client.
Calm down
You are correct, but no need to sound that way.
The starcraft-URL does follow the standard. Presumably it opens the SC2 client and navigates to the profile if clicked.
A lot of programs use URLs like this. On top of my head:
magnet: - Opens a bittorrent program and starts downloading the specified torrent spotify: - Opens the specified playlist/album/artist/song in the spotify client xfire: - Used to join servers in games
Yeah, sorry, maybe i sounded a bit too rude in that post
I just find it strange to always blame blizzard for every single feature they add to the game, i mean, they worked really hard for this patch and we are never happy!
But people are(or at least appear to be) happy with the update to the UI. If you look at the response to the update in any forum or post about it, people are overwhelmingly positive when it is first announced. However, since both Blizzard and TL are world wide sites, at some point someone posts their displeasure with the changes. Then other people who are displeased latch onto that post and continue the thread in that vain and discuss why their do not like the changes. People argue with these posters and support the changes and the thread continues. But if you think about, out of all the people that enjoy SC2.
Think of the internet as Yelp reviews. If you read a one star yelp review, you will often find one say stuff like “loved the food, but got a parking ticket”, others are well written but have little to do with the food. But all you care about is the food. Just because someone took the time to post something on the internet does not mean that it is true or is how everyone else feels. And just because they are able to connect with other people in the world with the same idea does not mean that they are the majority. Even if a thread is thousands of posts, that does not mean it is important. Because a post can be done in 10 minutes on my commute to work, or on in the bathroom, where I have nothing else to do and I am killing time.
On February 21 2013 22:07 yyfpulls wrote: So much nitpicking, I think the UI is fine. And who is even going to bother using all those hotkeys anyways? No one cares about Menu APM sorry to say.
Then you never played WC3. For us Warcraft players, we were in heaven and we didn't even know it. How do you take so many steps backwards from a game released in 2002?
It's funny that you mention it cauz most bw players HATED that wc3's interface. Now we're getting wc3 players hating on sc2's interface. Guess we don't like change maybe ? Or maybe it takes time before getting used to it.
Definitely the best pointless thread on TL atm. The new UI is actually a lot better than the trash they had before, and the only nitpicking I care about is the victory music, which is just silly.
I know this wasn't even close to the point of the whole thing, but I liked the mention of The Lost Vikings and Rock and Roll Racing. I forgot about those; they were some pretty awesome old Blizzard games. There are even Lost Vikings references in SCII (and almost every other Blizzard game, they really seem proud of that one) if you look hard enough.
I read the first part about hotkeys, but I really don't see the need... SC2 is a computer RTS game you play with mainly your mouse, not fucking emacs. What would a mouseless navigation through the menus bring? You'll have to use your mouse at some point anyway, might as well practice your mouse accuracy and speed by clicking on the menu items or something. You want to eat and/or jack off while firing up a ladder game? Well, use your other hand to do that (you know, the keyboard hand, because the navigation is currently keyboardless, this is what you're getting at). You find using your mouse not convenient, not as fast, or tiring? Well you might want to stop playing this game then.
Although I gotta admit, this is the best formatted and researched post on a pointless and irrelevant topic I've seen in a long time.
On February 22 2013 01:42 maartendq wrote: I sometimes believe I'm the only one here who has never had a problem with B.net 2.0's interface from the beginning. It perfectly allowed me to do what I wanted it to do: play starcraft 2 and chat with friends.
Haha so much this. Never bothered me in the slightest. I think people who want to have a clan or play many custom games have some legit concerns, which might be addressed with the Arcade and Bnet 2.0.4/HotS.
I sometimes believe I'm the only one here who has never had a problem with B.net 2.0's interface from the beginning. It perfectly allowed me to do what I wanted it to do: play starcraft 2 and chat with friends.
A command-line interface would bring faster and cleaner navigation (perhaps not when looking for custom maps, but still, a Linux-like <tab> key to show the existing map names would help). The problems would be having a learning curve (I would not mind), less modernity (but let's not forget that GUI will never be as efficient as CLR) -- but since the normal GUI version will not be removed, I don't see any problem. People who don't want to use it, will definitely not.
With this, you could log in just to chat from bad PCs (even phone, tablet, w/e).
Other Curiosities when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically. Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
I don't know why you call that "Curiosities", it's just extra features. 1) The real curiosity is that if you click on something that's already on your screen, it doesn't move the camera at all ( it doesn't center on the unit/building). Probably a concern about the smoothness of observer cam for esports broadcasts. 2) It's the other way around, YABOT copied the beginner training missions in WoL. 2.0.4's challenges have exactly the same UI, same sounds and types of objective. Consistently enough.
Other Curiosities when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically. Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
I don't know why you call that "Curiosities", it's just extra features. 1) The real curiosity is that if you click on something that's already on your screen, it doesn't move the camera at all ( it doesn't center on the unit/building). Probably a concern about the smoothness of observer cam for esports broadcasts. 2) It's the other way around, YABOT copied the beginner training missions in WoL. 2.0.4's challenges have exactly the same UI, same sounds and types of objective. Consistently enough.
1). If you've activated the "Follow Unit (Ctrl-Shift-F)" function during game-play or observation, everything you click on until you move your camera is centered and followed. The reason why clicking on objects when you're not following them doesn't center your screen is because if you have over 10 APM it would be a total mindfuck. 2). YABOT was far more comprehensive than anything used before it in SC2 challenges or tutorials. YABOT also took into account the metagame and was updated accordingly. Basically, Blizzard put a custom map-maker out of business and probably won't give them any credit. Granted, there probably isn't any money on the line for the custom map maker.
What some consider to be "nit-picking" is actually an accumulation of annoyance from having to navigate a shitty user interface that needs to be vocalized. Thanks OP for making this thread and hopefully someone from Blizzard gets to see it who isn't overly dismissive of the whole thing. Some good points were made about inconsistency and bugs (mostly key-bind related bugs, it seems). I don't agree with everything but I second the notion that Blizzard proves to us all the time that they care more about adding nonsensical casual-friendly UI features than they do about testing. Sad, because it's the disappointed fans who typically have the staying power while the casuals die off.
EDIT: I feel like the Blizzard launcher is overlooked as something terrible that causes many of us headaches. Lately, I can't even get to the launcher because of a trash ethernet controller driver that I'm not even using for an internet connection. The launcher detects the erroneous driver and won't pass the "updating blizzard launcher" phase until a driver reinstall. Odd, because I use wireless.
On February 22 2013 01:42 maartendq wrote: I sometimes believe I'm the only one here who has never had a problem with B.net 2.0's interface from the beginning. It perfectly allowed me to do what I wanted it to do: play starcraft 2 and chat with friends.
At least we're two... But better be quiet about it.
Other Curiosities when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically. Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
I don't know why you call that "Curiosities", it's just extra features. 1) The real curiosity is that if you click on something that's already on your screen, it doesn't move the camera at all ( it doesn't center on the unit/building). Probably a concern about the smoothness of observer cam for esports broadcasts. 2) It's the other way around, YABOT copied the beginner training missions in WoL. 2.0.4's challenges have exactly the same UI, same sounds and types of objective. Consistently enough.
1). If you've activated the "Follow Unit (Ctrl-Shift-F)" function during game-play or observation, everything you click on until you move your camera is centered and followed. The reason why clicking on objects when you're not following them doesn't center your screen is because if you have over 10 APM it would be a total mindfuck.
I was obviously talking about replays, not about when you actually play (who uses the follow mode while playing :D). You might want to take a look at the new feature in HotS and 2.0.4. You can now click on things in the production or unit tab and the camera is instantly centered on that thing. Not a mindfuck at all, but a weird behavior if you click on things that are on the same screen. Why not center every time you click (in an item in the production tab, not on anything in the game), was my question.
2). YABOT was far more comprehensive than anything used before it in SC2 challenges or tutorials. YABOT also took into account the metagame and was updated accordingly. Basically, Blizzard put a custom map-maker out of business and probably won't give them any credit. Granted, there probably isn't any money on the line for the custom map maker. [...]
Unless I'm mistaken, the mini-challenges from Blizzard are intended for beginners. No practice and no metagame here. OP was just talking about the UI design I think, not about the features. The day hasn't come that I will stop using YABOT for practicing builds, I can tell you that :D
Other Curiosities when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically. Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
I don't know why you call that "Curiosities", it's just extra features. 1) The real curiosity is that if you click on something that's already on your screen, it doesn't move the camera at all ( it doesn't center on the unit/building). Probably a concern about the smoothness of observer cam for esports broadcasts. 2) It's the other way around, YABOT copied the beginner training missions in WoL. 2.0.4's challenges have exactly the same UI, same sounds and types of objective. Consistently enough.
1). If you've activated the "Follow Unit (Ctrl-Shift-F)" function during game-play or observation, everything you click on until you move your camera is centered and followed. The reason why clicking on objects when you're not following them doesn't center your screen is because if you have over 10 APM it would be a total mindfuck.
I was obviously talking about replays, not about when you actually play (who uses the follow mode while playing :D). You might want to take a look at the new feature in HotS and 2.0.4. You can now click on things in the production or unit tab and the camera is instantly centered on that thing. Not a mindfuck at all, but a weird behavior if you click on things that are on the same screen. Why not center every time you click (in an item in the production tab, not on anything in the game), was my question.
2). YABOT was far more comprehensive than anything used before it in SC2 challenges or tutorials. YABOT also took into account the metagame and was updated accordingly. Basically, Blizzard put a custom map-maker out of business and probably won't give them any credit. Granted, there probably isn't any money on the line for the custom map maker. [...]
Unless I'm mistaken, the mini-challenges from Blizzard are intended for beginners. No practice and no metagame here. OP was just talking about the UI design I think, not about the features. The day hasn't come that I will stop using YABOT for practicing builds, I can tell you that :D
Regarding the first one, does it just center on the object (off-screen object) or does it select it?
Let's say I'm observing a zerg making 60 Zerglings from 5 hatcheries, and I click on the zergling (60) button on the production tab. One of the 5 hatcheries is on-screen. What happens to the camera? Does anything happen to my selection if I have, say, a queen selected?
Other Curiosities when watching a replay or observing a game, clicking on the image placeholder in the production tab will automatically center the camera on that area specifically. Stage one training has a build order feature that is directly lifted form YABOT.
I don't know why you call that "Curiosities", it's just extra features. 1) The real curiosity is that if you click on something that's already on your screen, it doesn't move the camera at all ( it doesn't center on the unit/building). Probably a concern about the smoothness of observer cam for esports broadcasts. 2) It's the other way around, YABOT copied the beginner training missions in WoL. 2.0.4's challenges have exactly the same UI, same sounds and types of objective. Consistently enough.
1). If you've activated the "Follow Unit (Ctrl-Shift-F)" function during game-play or observation, everything you click on until you move your camera is centered and followed. The reason why clicking on objects when you're not following them doesn't center your screen is because if you have over 10 APM it would be a total mindfuck.
I was obviously talking about replays, not about when you actually play (who uses the follow mode while playing :D). You might want to take a look at the new feature in HotS and 2.0.4. You can now click on things in the production or unit tab and the camera is instantly centered on that thing. Not a mindfuck at all, but a weird behavior if you click on things that are on the same screen. Why not center every time you click (in an item in the production tab, not on anything in the game), was my question.
2). YABOT was far more comprehensive than anything used before it in SC2 challenges or tutorials. YABOT also took into account the metagame and was updated accordingly. Basically, Blizzard put a custom map-maker out of business and probably won't give them any credit. Granted, there probably isn't any money on the line for the custom map maker. [...]
Unless I'm mistaken, the mini-challenges from Blizzard are intended for beginners. No practice and no metagame here. OP was just talking about the UI design I think, not about the features. The day hasn't come that I will stop using YABOT for practicing builds, I can tell you that :D
Regarding the first one, does it just center on the object (off-screen object) or does it select it?
Let's say I'm observing a zerg making 60 Zerglings from 5 hatcheries, and I click on the zergling (60) button on the production tab. One of the 5 hatcheries is on-screen. What happens to the camera? Does anything happen to my selection if I have, say, a queen selected?
I can't check myself right now, but I seem to remember that it does select what you clicked on. And in this video it does too:
You've put a lot of effort in it, but this just seems so very much nitpicky to me... From my experience the new interface works really great. How you can call it 'not designed for pc' is really beyond me. Skyrim's interface is not made for pc, you should try that one... This one most definitely is and it works great with a mouse. Not once did I get lost in the UI. This update is so much better than the old 1.5.
On February 22 2013 01:42 maartendq wrote: I sometimes believe I'm the only one here who has never had a problem with B.net 2.0's interface from the beginning. It perfectly allowed me to do what I wanted it to do: play starcraft 2 and chat with friends.
At least we're two... But better be quiet about it.
Three, but dont let anyone know we are happy and excited.....
On February 22 2013 03:09 Hylirion wrote: You've put a lot of effort in it, but this just seems so very much nitpicky to me... From my experience the new interface works really great. How you can call it 'not designed for pc' is really beyond me. Skyrim's interface is not made for pc, you should try that one... This one most definitely is and it works great with a mouse. Not once did I get lost in the UI. This update is so much better than the old 1.5.
Oh man, I didn't even think about that. The new B.net is way better than Skyrim's interface. Or Borderlands one, which had the worst menus ever.
On February 22 2013 03:09 Hylirion wrote: You've put a lot of effort in it, but this just seems so very much nitpicky to me... From my experience the new interface works really great. How you can call it 'not designed for pc' is really beyond me. Skyrim's interface is not made for pc, you should try that one... This one most definitely is and it works great with a mouse. Not once did I get lost in the UI. This update is so much better than the old 1.5.
Oh man, I didn't even think about that. The new B.net is way better than Skyrim's interface. Or Borderlands one, which had the worst menus ever.
Oh why would you remind us about Borderlands interface. I honestly think Skyrim's interface was worse though. As far as lack of sense, it tops the recent list.
I think some of your complaints/points are completely non-issues.
As mentioned, the dice is a 2-point perspective, with the points being relatively close obviously.
Copy link seems more or less clear and intuitive and works as intended. If you paste it anywhere on battle.net (at least Starcraft 2 battle.net), anyone who clicks on it will be taken to that page.
The race icon changes are great. I could see swapping terran and random's colors though, or at least making terran gray or white. The new icons are so much easier to distinguish at a glance because of the different colors. I have no idea what you're talking about with the reference to a race's color scheme, aside from maybe terran. Protoss are mostly yellow, and zerg are mostly purple; those colors are perfectly suitable.
That said, I agree that game developers in general don't work on useability, accessibility, or efficiency enough on PC games. So many things make little-to-no use of keyboard shortcuts, and even when there is, there's oftentimes critical shortcuts missing that make it less useful. One of my biggest peeves is the the scenario where text size is not scalable, either at all, or enough. I guess Starcraft 2 is a big offender for this.
The biggest thing I hate about battle.net for Starcraft 2 is the engine used for the UI. As far as I know, the UI engine is essentially a modified [Adobe] Flash. I guess it make's someone's job easier by using it, but aside from the main downside, I'm sure it has some other really nasty downsides as well. The main downside I notice is that it uses a buttload of CPU processing power. I get more CPU usage out-of-game (near the start of the game) than in-game, which is ridiculous. If you have a slower computer (like minimum spec for running SC2) this is particularly noticeable, and really unacceptable in my opinion. Why the hell should a game perform faster and more efficiently than it's out-of-game UI?
AOL chatrooms were very popular but there was the scandal with pedophiles grooming children in it. Blizzard is probably being very careful about implementing chat features to ward off potential scandals themselves; especially considering the gaming population is overwhelmingly below the legal age.
On February 21 2013 06:02 derpface wrote: I bet your rl job is a auditor...
actually, I'm a contemporary classical composer.
If you ever wondered if there was interest Ina blog about your compositions, there is! From me. Haha. You should totally do a series on a piece you're writing. If you're not too busy that is.
AWESOME. Can I add two more? 1: The Victory sound is not affected by volume. I have my volume at 20% for casting and still this sound is REALLY loud. 2: The client doesn't remember which channels or groups I was in last time (that is, I had opened), so every time I log in I have to type the channels' names and for groups go to the groups menu and look for each one individually. I know featured groups are featured, but should they really be that much more accessible than my own clan, even when I'm not a part of them?
I found a little thing I figured I should post here?
When in profile/rewards/animations, there's a little question mark help thing at the top. When you mouse over it it tells you how to execute the unit animation, but it says "enter" no matter what your chat hotkey is set to. This is different from most the tips and things where it shows your specific key in a light blue/teal color.
On February 22 2013 15:28 plogamer wrote: AOL chatrooms were very popular but there was the scandal with pedophiles grooming children in it. Blizzard is probably being very careful about implementing chat features to ward off potential scandals themselves; especially considering the gaming population is overwhelmingly below the legal age.
hahahaha this actually reminded me of an experience from Broodwar.
I was playing a public game vs. AI and my ally starts a discussion relating to working out, bodybuilding, etc. which was benign enough at first (especially considering my screen name), but then he started to get a little weird, asking me what I wear to the gym, which definitely raised some eyebrows.
He then asks me if there is anything private I want to tell him, that I can tell him anything, even something that I would be afraid to tell other people. Puzzled, I declined his offer, at which point he then fantasized in alarming detail about how he would like to give me a backrub with scented oil. At this point I promptly left the game lol
You are right, there are definitely some weirdo pervs out there, even on Battle.net so it makes sense that Blizzard would see this as a potential liability, which is unfortunate because an easily accessible, social community adds so much to the game.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/awcdX2B.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ul4tyeG.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZSQLWzb.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bzvNjYi.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WT7hULa.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uXfoQAi.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/r7sl48E.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Uot8pkG.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Wfcffrm.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JpJfpdI.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Un2nAOr.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WWYpGMV.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yC8suDF.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XjNb3Gq.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QlYdreC.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OOe18yp.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UVXymIR.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ucjjMyU.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yNiAlDK.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tyYUvYn.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IyZM94L.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CwrzTH9.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VZ2e6H5.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oYU09sM.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RidkqKE.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/V2Oo5sR.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WgYQcSO.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CxVmGnS.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SGus3pF.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WOgb1zB.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZUxDC7Y.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/P0tiVNz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CHcjgEN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8nJvvEY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wh85QnV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Kxfk6R2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iJt4mLi.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Szrk5rt.jpg)
