mockups
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2010 03:27
Two quick ones of how it could be made to look better. Click for full size.
Interesting. They could be used for cardtype, but as I created them they are not:TorbenBeta wrote:...how you changed the type of card into big letters like C, A.
Yes, my reasoning on that is connected to the next reply below: I don't think version number and exact date and time of creation of that version is super important to the average user of cardscape: 80-90% of the players will use it as mainly a database.I liked that you put the version number under everything
Info contains whatever we don't put in there as it is now. Stuff that could be nice to know and that is easy to know when we have a digital database but that isn't deemed as necessary for cardscape to function from the perspective of a player.and the different tabs like history, info (what should be in there exactly?), report and edit. And that the logo is in the top. I think I like how you changed the comment area.
I only take things as an insult when they're off topic and personal, if even then. Criticism is the only way to improvement, at least if it's also constructive.Some things I disliked: I dislike (don't take that as an insult)...
I think it should be as minimal as possible. If we had a good logo I would remove "WTactics" as well since our database & card creation tool page isn't anywhere a normal first time visitor would ever go to learn about the identity of the game, nor would it (the title of cardscape page) fill any huge function for branding the game and making the name known.that you removed /../ "WTactics - Cardscape - Card Development Software".
I'm not sure how it was clearer in the original version: I opted for removing table lines since I find them cluttering. Instead I use space and bold font. Overall I think it's as clear as before, maybe even clearer.I also don't like that you changed the info table, because I think it was more clear in the original.
From which brown? The yellow/beige background in the originalA thing I'm not sure about is the colour, why did you change that from brown to blue/grey? I don't like that you put a zero before the numbers in the comment area, could you kindly explain the reasons?
They should NOT be used for cardtype because for cardscape to be portable, all of the code that makes visual effects should use only the info not specific to the game. Otherwise, each project will have to reprogram the card.php file to make sure that it uses their specific card definition.snowdrop wrote:Interesting. They could be used for cardtype, but as I created them they are not:TorbenBeta wrote:...how you changed the type of card into big letters like C, A.
I like this idea, though it might confuse people who are new to cardscape to just see a giant letter. What could we do to make it more intuitive?They show the status of the card. Each letter and color corresponds to something along the lines of Concept/Refine/Approved/Official etc.
Agreed. Hide the info that is unimportant to non-devs.Yes, my reasoning on that is connected to the next reply below: I don't think version number and exact date and time of creation of that version is super important to the average user of cardscape: 80-90% of the players will use it as mainly a database.I liked that you put the version number under everything
This is fine for us to do if we want to hack our own software, but paired stats will probably not show up in the actual cardscape software. This goes back to having to program extra code for things that are specific to a single game, and not cardscape as a whole. By making paired stats, cardscape will lose its portability.What could be perceived as less clear is the fact that I combined two variables from the database and that I did it twice: The gold / threshold and the attack / defense. Before they were displayed as single posts. Now they're paired as described above. Reason for that is to save some screen estate, which allows us to have bigger text and better readability, but also because attack and defense is already paired in the game, both on creature card and also when adding modifiers.
Once again, abbreviations make portability an issue. However, I think this one would be relatively easy to implement.I do agree that using abbreviations is less clear. I however don't think it's worth spelling out the full word since it, again, eats space. It would take a newcomer 3 to 15 seconds to learn the abbreviations, especially when looking at the picture next to them and/or hovering over them (which could explain what they stand for in a tool tip). Then that person would know this forever.
Look is last on the list. PHP first. It can all be molded any way we want in the end.. I'm not sure when I'll have time to change the looks, since core features are a bit more important, but I think this will be the way it'll end up looking.
When hovered upon there's a slight delay. After that a tooltip pop-up appears with a short & snappy explanation. Same goes for abbreviations etc. Think thats doable both with CSS and/or javascript.I like this idea, though it might confuse people who are new to cardscape to just see a giant letter. What could we do to make it more intuitive?
Nothing relating to WT should be hardcoded. Everyhting, all fields, names, text etc, should be configurable from config.php....paired stats will probably not show up in the actual cardscape software. This goes back to having to program extra code for things that are specific to a single game, and not cardscape as a whole. By making paired stats, cardscape will lose its portability. /../ abbreviations make portability an issue.