-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
Graphics still matter...
- Thread starter Dermott of LS
- Start date
- Watchers 10
I was referring to 'feel', not 'function'. The EC's bells & whistles should definitely be in a 4th client, just so their not so intrusive to the play experience, they need to be pleasant sounds, not the racket they can be in the EC. Where having people talented at making UI's do a 4th client would be a very good thing, you wind up with few, if any, rough edges.
Old Gypsy you and Madrid should be a pair... NO dropping the old client. end of discussion on that one. Kapesch? (sleeping wih the fishies apeals to you? Looks at cement and buckett)
The only way EA would ever think to fix up UO is if a new company bought them out and dumped the whole board and upper management.
EA has been so stingy and penny pinching.. twards its mmorg's is clear as long as they can nickel and dime them oh and dont forget givethem hand me downs they "barrowed" from other areas.
UO has potential to get back up there and make the gamer happy.
Not all but a good portion of work needs be in the graphics department. CC can be glorious... with the right fingers onthe keys the upgrade in code and i bet even you sticks in the mud would think twice.
Pinco is dead on when he said EA never tried.
Hopes have been dashed year after year by EA. Rather then putting that millions they paid that poor excuse for an artist into the game design... classic would be the one to beat..
player base would not be in question... heck shards would all be like Atlantic... but nickle and dime us to death EA... see what you hath rot
The only way EA would ever think to fix up UO is if a new company bought them out and dumped the whole board and upper management.
EA has been so stingy and penny pinching.. twards its mmorg's is clear as long as they can nickel and dime them oh and dont forget givethem hand me downs they "barrowed" from other areas.
UO has potential to get back up there and make the gamer happy.
Not all but a good portion of work needs be in the graphics department. CC can be glorious... with the right fingers onthe keys the upgrade in code and i bet even you sticks in the mud would think twice.
Pinco is dead on when he said EA never tried.
Hopes have been dashed year after year by EA. Rather then putting that millions they paid that poor excuse for an artist into the game design... classic would be the one to beat..
player base would not be in question... heck shards would all be like Atlantic... but nickle and dime us to death EA... see what you hath rot
As I said in post 100, " has a feel more like the CC than the EC". If they vary it some I've no problem with that. Just so it's not so dramatically different as the EC is with how you interact with the game content. Hopefully they don't do another severe XP to Windows 8 style change in any 4th client try. If EA can learn from past mistakes, there's hope.
Your one of the exceptions to the rule per the news reports on Windows 8 then. You ran into features you like. Copies of Windows 8 do sell.
Like I said, get the start bar back and it is the best OS they've made. Fast, smooth, and you can choose to use it identically to how you've used Windows forever (essentially; it's still more Vista/7 than XP or earlier but that's really only a slight difference) or with the new Metro UI or whatever.
Just a couple of random comments:
1) The CC can not become "glorious" without being re-written from the ground up. There's just not enough material in it to use modern stuff. If it were capable of such feats, it would have done so long ago. That said, there's no reason that a new client couldn't be built that would have the same base UI as the CC, but with many of the improvements and innovations that would be necessary to make it viable (not saying make it look like the EC, but there are many improvements within the EC that would be great inside the CC).
2) Windows 8 was not designed for "current" Windows users. Microsoft took a huge risk and aimed it at people largely unfamiliar with Windows -- those who sit down in front of computers and say, "Now where do I go again," those who are more familiar with an Xbox, and those more familiar with phones and tablets -- and they unified the Microsoft interface across the board. While it's taken a bit for me to get used to on my laptop, I have to be honest, I'm even fine without the Start menu now. Are there things I'd change? Yes. But in truth, once you're used to it, many things are, indeed, more intuitive. It was strange to not be familiar with Windows when I first started using it, but it took no time at all to get used to it.
People naturally resist change, but the risk Microsoft took is, to be frank, brilliant!
And the comparison between Windows 7 and Widows 8 could be the CC vs. the EC. The thing is... Windows 8 provides advanced functionality and a UI that is intuitive once you know a couple of small things. The EC leaves some people struggling for months (at least without Pinco's).
But... obviously there will be some Windows 8 holdouts, much like the EC vs. the CC. Difference being, Windows 8 won't be abandoned and slowly developed.
1) The CC can not become "glorious" without being re-written from the ground up. There's just not enough material in it to use modern stuff. If it were capable of such feats, it would have done so long ago. That said, there's no reason that a new client couldn't be built that would have the same base UI as the CC, but with many of the improvements and innovations that would be necessary to make it viable (not saying make it look like the EC, but there are many improvements within the EC that would be great inside the CC).
2) Windows 8 was not designed for "current" Windows users. Microsoft took a huge risk and aimed it at people largely unfamiliar with Windows -- those who sit down in front of computers and say, "Now where do I go again," those who are more familiar with an Xbox, and those more familiar with phones and tablets -- and they unified the Microsoft interface across the board. While it's taken a bit for me to get used to on my laptop, I have to be honest, I'm even fine without the Start menu now. Are there things I'd change? Yes. But in truth, once you're used to it, many things are, indeed, more intuitive. It was strange to not be familiar with Windows when I first started using it, but it took no time at all to get used to it.
People naturally resist change, but the risk Microsoft took is, to be frank, brilliant!
And the comparison between Windows 7 and Widows 8 could be the CC vs. the EC. The thing is... Windows 8 provides advanced functionality and a UI that is intuitive once you know a couple of small things. The EC leaves some people struggling for months (at least without Pinco's).
But... obviously there will be some Windows 8 holdouts, much like the EC vs. the CC. Difference being, Windows 8 won't be abandoned and slowly developed.
I agree with this.
Windows 8's future will be determined by how well it goes over with user's over the years. It may go over with Users like XP did and hold on as the popular version for years until it's finally dropped by the company, or it may go over like Vista did, and get dropped by the company's customer's and have more people trying Ubuntu or Windows 7. If 8 bombs out with Microsoft's customers, we'll likely see a 9 in the next couple of years. Microsoft made changes, change can be good, or not good, Microsoft rolled the dice and will win or lose. <shrugs>
Agreed... point sort of being that regardless, Microsoft won't say, "Well, here's Windows 8. Guess we'll just leave it at that." And I suspect, in truth, Windows 8 will be relatively short lived by comparison. It's a bridge between what was and what will be, in my opinion. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Giving people time to adapt from what they're used to to getting used to what, in many aspects, is a more intuitive operating system. Trouble is, it's counter-intuitive to what all of us "old timers" know. But we can learn.
Exactly. It would have to be an entirely new client with beautiful graphics and a "feel good" truly intuitive functionality. Anything short of that would be another flop.
Considering the fact that I'm a die-hard CC user, and have repeatedly indicated that the only way I'd change clients is if they created a completely new one that was far superior in every way to both of the existing clients... well, I surely don't know how you lumped me and Madrid together.
In any case, I don't anticipate that a sparkling, superior new client for UO is likely to become a reality. It appears that you and I will both be using the CC for quite a long time to come.
You know I got a tiny insert here ... its a question really. (PINCO LOOK AWAY)
If Pinco was not here and made his app for UO's EC how many of you who do use it would remain using EC? I mean if we only had CC and just the plain EC as it sits in the code.
No wonders of Pnico's handywork...
If Pinco was not here and made his app for UO's EC how many of you who do use it would remain using EC? I mean if we only had CC and just the plain EC as it sits in the code.
No wonders of Pnico's handywork...
You should start a thread with this question.
...
Secondly, if the question is to consider the idea that the EC would have NOT been UI moddable by ANYONE, then I would return the same question back in regards to the CC and UOA.
Finally, in answer to the question, if I had to choose between the CC and the EC with its base UI, I would still choose the EC because even at its base, the EC does FAR MORE for me in terms of accessibility to the game than the CC does. In fact, I can highlight a few items specifically (Notye that this compares the BASE EC UI with the BASE CC UI... no add-ons of any type):
1. The EC gameplay window will stretch to any resolution size. I'm not stuck to an 800x600 gameplay window on a 1920x1080 monitor.
2. The Zoom feature. I can zoom in or out based on what I need to be doping at that time. If it's close-in stuff like targeting specific spots or items, I can zoom in, if it's traveling from point A to point B, I can zoom out.
3. More powerful macro system allows me to do things via macro scripts that CANNOT be done in the 2d client. The 2d client does not allow me to use a single keystroke to smelt every possible ore type.
4. Hotbars. They can be used as resource display, stats/mods display, I can use any item from them with several targeting options, I can put spells or macros on them again with multiple targeting options, I can place pre-built macros on them. I can set up a "macro map" to match the layout of my Nostromo as a heads up display or simply hide them as necessary.
5. List and Grid View containers. Allows me to organize, sort, and search containers much more easily without the need for multiple sub-containers freeing up storage space. Also shows how many of an item in a stack without having to mouse over to find out.
The only thing that would bother me about the EC UI without UI Mods really is just the default UI Theme itself. All of the other bells and whistles are just that... nice, but they don't make or break my client decision.
The question as stated is a false premise that disregards the works of several modders beyond Pinco. While Pinco is currently the only primarily active modder in terms of entire UI suites, this disregards several other UI mods that have been available to players and work from other modders.
Secondly, if the question is to consider the idea that the EC would have NOT been UI moddable by ANYONE, then I would return the same question back in regards to the CC and UOA.
Finally, in answer to the question, if I had to choose between the CC and the EC with its base UI, I would still choose the EC because even at its base, the EC does FAR MORE for me in terms of accessibility to the game than the CC does. In fact, I can highlight a few items specifically (Notye that this compares the BASE EC UI with the BASE CC UI... no add-ons of any type):
1. The EC gameplay window will stretch to any resolution size. I'm not stuck to an 800x600 gameplay window on a 1920x1080 monitor.
2. The Zoom feature. I can zoom in or out based on what I need to be doping at that time. If it's close-in stuff like targeting specific spots or items, I can zoom in, if it's traveling from point A to point B, I can zoom out.
3. More powerful macro system allows me to do things via macro scripts that CANNOT be done in the 2d client. The 2d client does not allow me to use a single keystroke to smelt every possible ore type.
4. Hotbars. They can be used as resource display, stats/mods display, I can use any item from them with several targeting options, I can put spells or macros on them again with multiple targeting options, I can place pre-built macros on them. I can set up a "macro map" to match the layout of my Nostromo as a heads up display or simply hide them as necessary.
5. List and Grid View containers. Allows me to organize, sort, and search containers much more easily without the need for multiple sub-containers freeing up storage space. Also shows how many of an item in a stack without having to mouse over to find out.
The only thing that would bother me about the EC UI without UI Mods really is just the default UI Theme itself. All of the other bells and whistles are just that... nice, but they don't make or break my client decision.