Menu/Gui Concepts (Loading/Startup)

[sparhawk]

So here we are again, redoing menus that people agreed that they liked a few months ago.

 

Not surprising considering that it was done months ago. It's a waste of time. Such detailed stuff should be done when the actual work starts. Not months ago, because in the meantime opinion and knowledge changes.

[SneaksieDave]

Finally got it downloaded - that startup animation (with 'The Dark Mod', and the clock, TO BE CLEAR! ) is wicked awesome. See, there's good stuff being passed all around... use it all!

 

Although, isn't the clock stolen? So surely, that'd be just a proof-of-concept?

 

I'm just saying! Yeesh, stone me to death!

[Springheel]

Such detailed stuff should be done when the actual work starts. Not months ago, because in the meantime opinion and knowledge changes.

 

So artists should just sit around waiting for coders to give them the 'ok' to actually do something? Don't kid yourself. This has nothing to do with knowledge changing--it's just an inability for people to make up their minds.

 

If anyone suggested we should pick a different company name, or that maybe we should do soundprop a different way, people would scream bloody murder. And justifiably so. But somehow when it comes to art, it's just accepted. Hell, maybe we should make a new lightgem--our current one had been around for a while and is pretty boring now.

 

People don't seem to get that when it comes to visuals, new things *always* seem more interesting than concepts that have been around for a few months, for no other reason than that they're *new*. But if this team can't stop changing it's mind every few months, we'll never finish anything.

[sparhawk]

So artists should just sit around waiting for coders to give them the 'ok' to actually do something?

 

I didn't say that, did I? But it should not be locked down and treated as set in stone at this time. It's ok if artists create differnt styles and concepts, but it should be decided when we actually start using it.

 

Don't kid yourself. This has nothing to do with knowledge changing--it's just an inability for people to make up their minds.

 

It's not. In the beginning I found almost everything exciting, and so tended to agree to a concept much faster because I liked it. After some time though, I started to look at it more critically and then it will happen that I don't like it as much anymore. And of course, it also happens, that somebody comes along with a much better idea.

 

or that maybe we should do soundprop a different way,

 

That would hardly be possible. And there is a big difference between intrinsic requireminets or art assesment.

 

Hell, maybe we should make a new lightgem--our current one had been around for a while and is pretty boring now.

 

That's a good suggestion.

 

You seem to imply that programming works like this that you define one thing and then it's settled for ever. In fact this is not the case. Why do you think I rewrote the lightgem code several times? Because I was bored? If we find a better solution, then we should bite the sour apple and use it, if it is better in the long run.

 

People don't seem to get that when it comes to visuals, new things *always* seem more interesting than concepts that have been around for a few months, for no other reason than that they're *new*. But if this team can't stop changing it's mind every few months, we'll never finish anything.

 

Actually, when I look at the lightgem I'm quite satisifed with it, even though it is now around for a long time. What you also don't seem to get is, that, even though a new concept may be interesting, it will will hardly surprising that there may be others wich are even better. And the first shot is usually not always the best one. We also reworked the lightgem several times, and I think with the current one everybody can live with. Why should we accept the very first concept if we notice after some time, that it doesn't look as good as it was when it was new?

[SneaksieDave]

I kinda felt bad at Springheel's post, because I understand where he's coming from, and I'm hoping no offense was felt by anyone. I just want to make clear, for my own conscience, that I think ALL of the major concepts put forth - the tree/city screen, the clock loader, the gear loader - they're ALL great, and should all be used for different areas, if at all possible. And that's not wishy-washy tiptoeing - they should all be used.

[Domarius]

Regarding the menu concept - I honestly couldn't care less. They are all good, and I would prefer if oDDity was modelling characters, I think that is far more important.

 

But this is expected from you. You have to memorize everything or you will loose stupid arguments...

That shows your mentality on discussions. The aim is not to "win", it's to reach a desicion we're all happy on.

Plus you won't "lose" the argument if you are correct in the first place, so if you are not, that is a fact of life. It happens to everyone. You can't hold people's good memory against them, just because you don't have one.

 

Anyway, this is not the case. There is a documentation forum, and it's maintained by us ALL, so if something isn't in there, you have only yourself to blame.

[Gildoran]

To me, it sounded like Sparhawk was mocking the fact that people seem to be expected to have a perfect memory during TDM arguments.

 

Edit: I just reread you post and realized you were saying something other than what I original thought.

[Domarius]

I know.

[sparhawk]

That shows your mentality on discussions. The aim is not to "win", it's to reach a desicion we're all happy on.

 

Unfortunately that's not MY mentalilty, it's the mentaillity that needs to be acquired.

 

You can't hold people's good memory against them, just because you don't have one.

 

You are confusing something here. My memory is not worse then others, but I simply refuse to store every puny little detail just to be able to use it in an argument later on. I try to solve the problem at hand, and document it, so I can forget about it because I don't want to remember all that minor details. These details are only important to remember when it comes to nitpicking though.

[sparhawk]

To me, it sounded like Sparhawk was mocking the fact that people seem to be expected to have a perfect memory during TDM arguments.

 

That was exactly my point.

[pakmannen]

I never said one was supposed to have perfect memory. But is it really too much to ask of people that they at least know what thread they are posting in? I mean it's right up there in the title of your browser.

 

I'm sorry if it came out as overly harsh Sneaksie, that was not my intention. Peace brother!

[SneaksieDave]

LOL! No probs, I was trying to make a funny so that while snapping back, it would be obvious I was being flip.

 

I bite heads easily too! Chomp chomp.

[Springheel]

Well, now that it's been a week since drumple wanted to start working on the menu, we should probably come to an agreement about which one he should work with.

 

I'll start a poll.

[pakmannen]

Right. Anyway.

 

Like I said I did some tinkering with the forest parts, so I merged in your changes to the cathedral and the houses: Background. Looking pretty okey now I think.

 

About the title. If we're going to do it as a Doom 3 font, I suppose we are quite limited in what we can do in terms of effects/shadows etc? We've got a Light logo concept and a Dark logo concept but I don't know. I think I prefer the light one though.

[New Horizon]

Right. Anyway.

 

Like I said I did some tinkering with the forest parts, so I merged in your changes to the cathedral and the houses: Background. Looking pretty okey now I think.

 

About the title. If we're going to do it as a Doom 3 font, I suppose we are quite limited in what we can do in terms of effects/shadows etc? We've got a Light logo concept and a Dark logo concept but I don't know. I think I prefer the light one though.

 

Hmmm, I'm partial to the Dark one myself. The light one clashes a bit much with the starkness of the screen.

[sparhawk]

Yeah. Me too. I think the "light" one looks much better and consistent. The "dark" one has some WIP feeling to it.

[Springheel]

I lean towards the light one myself.

[New Horizon]

Perhaps if it were toned down slightly. Just seems to bright to me for some reason.

[oDDity]

I did a dark version, which takes away the beveled look some didn't like.

 

http://208.49.149.118/TheDarkMod/Files/loader5.avi

[Fingernail]

I love it.

[oDDity]

..and I did a 'final' verison with sound and loader bar.

 

http://208.49.149.118/TheDarkMod/Files/loader7.avi

 

THis is just machine sounds I ttook fromt he ambients folder, but maybe you sound people can think of a more fitting one.

[New Horizon]

Won't the loader bar need to be done as a live graphic?

[Springheel]

I don't know, mission loads can sometimes last for a good minute or two. I think I'd get bored of watching those gears pretty quickly.

[oDDity]

It's just a default, I'm sure FM authors will want to put a level shot in the loading screen anyway- I know I would. Something more like this, rather than a generic default screen. Even a sequence of shots fading in and out would be good.

If you think the loading screen's job is to keep you entertained, we could put some dirty jokes on it as well.

[Springheel]

Even a sequence of shots fading in and out would be good.

 

Why don't we do that instead? I find your screenshot there much more interesting to look at then some 2d gears. And if we fade in and out some random ones it's even better. We could take the best screenshots of our maps on release and use them.