Is this still in development?

[fishfox]

Hey, so I've been watching this game for a while and downloaded the demo as soon as I saw it was available.  Honestly though for all it's supposed AI and realistic merits I find the interface a huge obstruction to gameplay.  Looking around the forums though it seems as if the game is still in development though, so I was wondering if the interface is still being worked on?
Thanks!

[Hook]

it seems as if the game is still in development though, so I was wondering if the interface is still being worked on?

Yes, and the game will continue to be worked on for several years.

What *exactly* is wrong with the interface?  First, assume the mouse commands will not change any time soon, and you aren't able to redefine them.  What else?

Hook

[fishfox]

You mean omitting any mouse controlled interface devices?

It generally feels like we're in the late 80s again, heh.  Not in a *bad* way per se, but I think standards have risen.  The interface is slow, battle map is jerky which really hurts my sense of spacial awareness at least.  Menus don't feel organized into optimal context groupings, unit cards are unclear.  Alot of the interface seems to be based off hovering your mouse - this is good when grabbing snippets of information, but if you have to move your mouse afterwards to click on something this quickly becomes annoying as the menu will pop back down.  Menus are annoying to navigate as they omit modern ease-of-menu technique like things - things like buttons highlighting, depressing, and then returning.  It's just little details like this that make up the user experience.  It's not enjoyable to interface with.  I know the focus is supposed to be on the realism and AI as opposed to arguably more superficial things like this.  Just to bring up the (probably dreaded around these parts hah!) Total War series, I can imagine how nice it would be if we plunked the rest of this game into its user interface.  It's intuitive and can be learned very quickly.  I know there are far more options in Histwar, but I feel like you could integrate all the addition options into that interface model quite easily or with the addition of another pane or two.  Just things like unit grouping, waypoints, targets, etc.

The interface just isn't up to modern par.  Superficial, maybe, if you're a purist, but for me I need to feel at home in the interface for it to be an experience that I can interface with and fully appreciate.  I haven't played with it that much, but I do generally think that if it's not easy within half an hours playtime, it could be done better.
Not to bash.  It just feels like a big letdown given the promise otherwise to me.

[Hook]

Thanks, fishfox.  You've brought up some valid points.  Most people just say they don't like it without giving details.  This is going to be useful.

While comparisons with TW are inevitable, how do we keep from reading your post, and others like it, and saying, "He doesn't like the interface because it's not TW"?  This isn't putting you down, or other TW players, but we've been getting that a lot.

How do you like the game play?  I know it's different from the TW games, and that you're a TW player, and I'm wondering if the actual game play is something a TW player might enjoy.

Hook

[fishfox]

I'm a HUGE fan of the HistWar concept.  Basically a 1000x more strategic than TW is, and with more nuance and historical accuracy.

I have a good time playing TW, but I wish it had more strategic depth - delayed communications, scouting, army groups, etc.  When I play TW the interface is intuitive enough that I can fully focus on what I'm doing in the game, which results in a more engaging and unobstructed enjoyment of the gameplay itself.

Basically, I want to feel comfortable enough with the interface that I can feel like I'm giving messages to my adjutants and not clicking around menus.  I want to feel like I'm at my battle map making decisions on the fly.
Here's some ways I could imagine doing that:

First off, I would suggest making organizational schemes constant throughout 2d and 3d modes.  Having different organizational schemes for different view modes requires that you learn something twice.

Maybe have a system of tabs to select the army group you want.

Click on a card once, and the units highlight on the 2d map or on the 3d map.  Click twice and the 3d map will zoom to the unit using a convenient vantage point.  In 2d mode this could zoom in on the unit.  Right clicking on unit cards or the movement would then bring up the individual commands - attack, defend, attach, etc.  Alternatively, there could be a context sensitive pane that displays orders in one static location.  Then once a command is issued a dialog box could come up asking for any more detailed input required.  Just a few ideas.  Using two mouse clicks to center is much faster than clicking once to select, and then using a key to center.

This is a big thing - menus that you use frequently and contain the same info should be in the same place each time.  It's simply mentally faster to go "Alright, this unit, I want to issue a command, mouse to bottom right of screen."  The alternative is having the box pop up next to the unit on the map as it does now which requires one to always navigate to a new portion of the screen.  It's just less streamlined.  

I also mentioned some common computer commands which are always nice because they're the same in almost all applications.  Ctrl click to select multipe, shift click to select a range, and right click to bring up contextual menus, etc.  Why not use computer knowledge that people already possess?  Same with viewing commands - ASDW keys are common in video games and are a better choice than the arrow keys because it leaves your right hand free to hit other keys on the keyboard.  Also, most people use their mouse in their right hand, and so it's inconvenient to cross your left hand over to the right side of the keyboard to move the camera.  Q and E then make nice keys for rotating the camera.

Hopefully this explains some of the concepts I'm thinking of when I mention TW games.  Really though, I could use many games as an example.  I just feel like I could be issuing the same orders with 1/6th the hassle.

And I can ensure without a doubt that if the interface can be cleaned up and professionalized a little bit there will be TW players joining the ranks.  Making things pretty also helps, although even less important.  With a little bit of texture work into the menus (I understand the 3d eyecandy will most likely remain very secondary) the game could look beautiful and also help one really immerse oneself into the gameplay.  Things like nice backgrounds, no jagged edges, a pretty compass, a pretty clock, etc.  This really isn't important to gameplay at all...but I do think a polished final product does help a player lose themself in the game a little bit more.  A game is always better if you can recede from the real world for a little while, become fully involved in the experience, and really enjoy every aspect of it. 

[Hook]

Good post.

I think some of what you're asking for is already being done, but not necessarily in the order you're trying to do it.  For example, if you are in the F3 3D view, and you're already using the F6 view to watch a unit, right clicking on a unit in the unit display will shift the view to that unit.

Keep in mind that the organization is a hierarchy.  The army commander, corps commanders, and regiment commanders from top to bottom.  We're missing a couple of levels at the moment, but they're planned for later inclusion in the game.  There are no army groups, no multiple selection, no range selection.  If you wish to transfer regiments from one corps to another, that's done individually, then the corps commander is given an order and he handles all the orders to the individual units.  If you're spending a lot of time giving orders to individual regiments, you're subverting the purpose of the hierarchy, and the whole game.  Once you start thinking of the corps in terms of the commander's name, "Bennigsen held the line while Rosenberg rolled up the enemy's flank", then you've got your head around the game.

There is a way to make an army group by using the liaison (Link up) order, if that's what you're talking about.

It might be useful to make a list:

1. What you want to do
2. How you are currently doing it in the game
3. How you'd prefer to be doing it

... for each item you want to change.  Organized that way we can understand quickly what the differences are and what might be done to help.  In many cases we might have suggestions on easier ways to do it.

Hook

[Hook]

Oh, and something I forgot.

Although I'm right handed, I currently have to use the mouse with my left hand because of a shoulder problem.  I can type for short periods of time, but trying to keep my right hand on the keyboard to do controls is painful.  For me, the more that can be done with the mouse, the better.

Hook

[fishfox]

As for multiple selections, etc., I can still see them being useful.  If I have 4 army groups (I'm sure my terminology is all off - I mean 4 generals, meaning fronts/flanks/etc.) I'd just prefer to select my left flank and right flank at once, and click a button to create diversions/put them on the defensive if I'm trying to push up the center.  It could also still be relevant in the context of inspecting individual components of your army, etc.  There is still a place where you can micro individual regiments through?  I'd like to be able to be the general on the front lines if the need arises.   

I'll try to go through the game and come up with some concrete proposals.  Mostly though I think alot still applies, in terms of simple things like keeping context menus in static locations, etc.

[Franciscus]

A big thank you to fishfox for explaining so clearly some interface problems and issues that I (and others) have tried to, with much less success.

Regards

[Formaldehyde]

This is a big thing - menus that you use frequently and contain the same info should be in the same place each time.  It's simply mentally faster to go "Alright, this unit, I want to issue a command, mouse to bottom right of screen."  The alternative is having the box pop up next to the unit on the map as it does now which requires one to always navigate to a new portion of the screen.  It's just less streamlined.  

Excellent point.

[JMM]

Really thank you for these well-build comments.
I am planning to rework the GUI after the release.

I know the focus is supposed to be on the realism and AI as opposed to arguably more superficial things like this.

A game must take care to all parts.. gameplay, robustness, adaptability to OS and driver, GUI

I tried to do a very intuitive GUI. A lot of people who doesn't play other games are able to quickly take the command of this interface. For other gamers, it's not right. So, I have to modify this GUI. Really, it's not possible before the first release.

Again thank for your comments...

JMM

[Mooncabbage]

It's really good to see the ongoing support JMM plans for this game. I wonder how much of it will be moddable? My main issue is with the click system. It's a false economy, because I make less clicks, but it's also far less precice. I have to make sure I move the mouse exactly where it needs to go to make sure I don't accidentally mouse over something I don't want to, and also wait for the game to register than I'm overing over something. I suggest replacing it with a more traditional click/double click system, but you probably have heard that 1000 times.

I wonder how much of the game will be moddable? I'd happily throw my hand in to improve the game as best I can, and I was already planning to try fixing the GUI :P

[Formaldehyde]

I posted this in the Grenadiers forum, but not everyone can see that- One area that could be improved is the corps selection.  As all selections are the same image, it is difficult to know which is which without scrolling over.  Below is a mock up I've made of a system that would better represent the information in a graphical manner.  It would also be nice to have the historical figures depicted in the game.

[fishfox]

I can definitely understand how this might be easier for people who haven't played very many videogames before.  I can definitely see it being alot easier that way, my main issue is that it clashes with much of my computer using experience and thus instinct.
Good to hear it's still being worked on though.  Thanks for the response too; it's always nice to see a game dev interacting with the community.

[Mooncabbage]

It's worth considering the ability to move the camera by putting the mouse to the edge of the screen ALA total war. Depends on your other interface changes though, if there is a lot of information close to the screen borders it might be better to give it a miss, because it results in a lot of unintentional camera movement otherwise. The WASD camera movement idea is a good one. It frees up the mouse for other things and is probably more precise. I have found right clicking to move the camera to units is useful aswell.