Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ehndras]

Exactly.

Steve couldn't give two shits about the players in reality because the game was made by him, for him. People just happened to like it and now tons of people play it. When it comes down to it though we're just getting the scraps. The choice material goes to Steve, and he won't have it any other way.

He's not out to get people to play Aurora or anything. It just sort of happened.

[ndkid]

UI doesn't need fixing. If it was simpler, there's be fewer options in the game. Also, completely re-designing the UI for the benefit of a minuscule number of players is just stressful and a waste of time. We can get by without the entire UI being revamped when the current one works; as long as we learn to work with the resolution. I couldn't play when I started because an inch of my screen is broken at the bottom plus I have a small laptop. After messing with settings, I got it to work and I never had an problem with the interface since!

Agreed. If I can get it to work without problems on a 1600x900 desktop, it is good enough. If you're trying to run it on a laptop, you're doing it wrong.

Fixed that for you. :-P

But, really, my joke is meant to highlight the "good enough for me" syndrome. You have a gaming setup you like, so you want things to work on it. For me, for years, that was a 1600x1200 CRT; now, it's a 1600x900 LCD, and, when I did play Aurora on a laptop, XPs auto-screen-scroll ability was good enough. Other people obviously disagreed, so Steve did some fiddling to come up with a way to scrunch it. I'm sure, if enough people kvetch, he might find a way to get it to run on yet smaller screens. All of this is fairly independent of whether the interface is good or bad; complex interfaces don't have to be bad, and simple interfaces aren't necessarily good.

And I say all of that independent of passing judgment on Aurora's interface itself. :-)

Steve has talked about how he plays on a three-screen setup, I believe; obviously, he's willing to make some concessions for other people trying to get enjoyment from his work. How far he's willing to go is harder to judge. Maybe the small vertical space potential was his last nod to the interface... maybe it wasn't. Maybe he'll get tired of the code tomorrow.

[Ehndras]

UI doesn't need fixing. If it was simpler, there's be fewer options in the game. Also, completely re-designing the UI for the benefit of a minuscule number of players is just stressful and a waste of time. We can get by without the entire UI being revamped when the current one works; as long as we learn to work with the resolution. I couldn't play when I started because an inch of my screen is broken at the bottom plus I have a small laptop. After messing with settings, I got it to work and I never had an problem with the interface since!

Agreed. If I can get it to work without problems on a 1600x900 desktop, it is good enough. If you're trying to run it on a laptop, you're doing it wrong.

Fixed that for you. :-P

But, really, my joke is meant to highlight the "good enough for me" syndrome. You have a gaming setup you like, so you want things to work on it. For me, for years, that was a 1600x1200 CRT; now, it's a 1600x1200 LCD, and, when I did play Aurora on a laptop, XPs auto-screen-scroll ability was good enough. Other people obviously disagreed, so Steve did some fiddling to come up with a way to scrunch it. I'm sure, if enough people kvetch, he might find a way to get it to run on yet smaller screens. All of this is fairly independent of whether the interface is good or bad; complex interfaces don't have to be bad, and simple interfaces aren't necessarily good.

And I say all of that independent of passing judgment on Aurora's interface itself. :-)

KVETCH!?

Holy shit, I haven't heard that word since I dated a Jewish chick when I was 17. Heh.

[Girlinhat]

So we're in agreement that "the UI problem" is that it doesn't fit in some screens?  Changing your resolution or using other tools isn't -that- hard to do, y'know?  We're out of the 90's, most of us should know our way around a computer and how to manipulate it a little.

And if you're on Bay12 forums complaining about an interface...  I don't even know what to say.  Do you have any idea where you are right now?

[PTTG??]

DF has a consistent interface; to build something, you generally go to one menu, to give orders to units, another... it's a lot of different things, but once you know the rules, it works. When you're trying to do something and know where to go, all the relevant commands are on the same screen or at most a few keystrokes away.

In Aurora, however, you need at least four different screens open and countless tabs to properly organize a small battle...

[Sirus]

DF has a consistent interface; to build something, you generally go to one menu, to give orders to units, another... it's a lot of different things, but once you know the rules, it works. When you're trying to do something and know where to go, all the relevant commands are on the same screen or at most a few keystrokes away.

In Aurora, however, you need at least four different screens open and countless tabs to properly organize a small battle...

Speak for yourself. I still can't figure out the new squad setup/military screen

[Girlinhat]

"q" and "t" in DF.  That is all.

[Flying Dice]

The funniest part about the interface complaints is that the tricks you need to make it playable are all very simple, and most of them are listed on the official forums.

UI doesn't need fixing. If it was simpler, there's be fewer options in the game. Also, completely re-designing the UI for the benefit of a minuscule number of players is just stressful and a waste of time. We can get by without the entire UI being revamped when the current one works; as long as we learn to work with the resolution. I couldn't play when I started because an inch of my screen is broken at the bottom plus I have a small laptop. After messing with settings, I got it to work and I never had an problem with the interface since!

Agreed. If I can get it to work without problems on a 1600x900 desktop, it is good enough. If you're trying to run it on a laptop, you're doing it wrong.

Fixed that for you. :-P

But, really, my joke is meant to highlight the "good enough for me" syndrome. You have a gaming setup you like, so you want things to work on it. For me, for years, that was a 1600x1200 CRT; now, it's a 1600x900 LCD, and, when I did play Aurora on a laptop, XPs auto-screen-scroll ability was good enough. Other people obviously disagreed, so Steve did some fiddling to come up with a way to scrunch it. I'm sure, if enough people kvetch, he might find a way to get it to run on yet smaller screens. All of this is fairly independent of whether the interface is good or bad; complex interfaces don't have to be bad, and simple interfaces aren't necessarily good.

And I say all of that independent of passing judgment on Aurora's interface itself. :-)

Steve has talked about how he plays on a three-screen setup, I believe; obviously, he's willing to make some concessions for other people trying to get enjoyment from his work. How far he's willing to go is harder to judge. Maybe the small vertical space potential was his last nod to the interface... maybe it wasn't. Maybe he'll get tired of the code tomorrow.

 The point was more that if you're playing with a screen with a resolution lower that 1024x768, you're probably trying to do so on a machine that is less computer and more next-gen graphic calculator. I don't like my craptop as a gaming setup; I use it because it is available. I bought it primarily for uni work. I'd love to have the funds and desk space for a high end desktop with a tri-monitor setup, but I don't. Hence why I play nothing but roguelikes, 4x, indie titles, and source mods. I hate having to play on this thing, but I don't have any other options, and I'd rather work around my problems than bitch about them hoping that a clearly indifferent dev will do something. To be honest, his response seemed more like a "screw off" than anything else, particularly when you consider the minimal amount of difference it made. Which was actually pretty funny, because it seems like most of the people who are complaining aren't the type to enjoy a spreadsheet management simulation. 

[Neonivek]

So we're in agreement that "the UI problem" is that it doesn't fit in some screens?  Changing your resolution or using other tools isn't -that- hard to do, y'know?  We're out of the 90's, most of us should know our way around a computer and how to manipulate it a little.

And if you're on Bay12 forums complaining about an interface...  I don't even know what to say.  Do you have any idea where you are right now?

Actually I was refering to the fact that you need a guide to do almost anything when often just obvious labling or just a reduction of redundency could help.

I mean... I watched a parody of a difficult game and it was less overly complex then Aurora at times... and in that you can to designate if you want to build more or less of a single unit.

[Repulsion]

So uh, what is the command to instantly build something? As in, with the starting build points?

Something and F9?

[Girlinhat]

Ctrl-S to enter Starmaster Mode (or Spacemaster, whatever).  Once in SM mode, you can instantly complete research projects.  If you have any starting RP, it'll reduce from that number, BUT it will let you go over.  Once you get down to like 10,000 RP you need to watch your spending, it will let you overspend without any warning.

Yeah it's a little hax, but eh, it works well enough and you only have to do it once, so it's not terribly bad.

[SirAaronIII]

Shift F9, make sure you're on the little Aurora toolbar thing and not system map or whatever.

[ndkid]

DF has a consistent interface; to build something, you generally go to one menu, to give orders to units, another... it's a lot of different things, but once you know the rules, it works. When you're trying to do something and know where to go, all the relevant commands are on the same screen or at most a few keystrokes away.

In Aurora, however, you need at least four different screens open and countless tabs to properly organize a small battle...

Personally, I find that I tend to be able to organize battles with just the battle control window. I need the TF menu only when movement needs to change, and the individual ship menu pretty much never. I suppose I could also see needing the system map in a few odd situations.

[RedKing]

Just a minor pet peeve, but I wish there was a unified interface for launching ships from bigger ships. Currently, fighters have one method, FAC's and other larger craft have to be launched from their individual ship pages. Makes managing a mixed carrier force a pain.

[LoSboccacc]

there is, in the taskgroup, launch/recover parasite buttons. but there is not an unified interface to assign them, and it's a real pain.