Development news: of gamepads and pumpkin season

Page: 1 2 3
Oct 20 2016, 5:11 am
In response to Lummox JR
It just doesn't represent BYOND's current state of affairs.

Just think of all the stuff you've been working on that you could show off. You've got gamepad support, webclient support ect.

That matters! But no one is ever going to know that if you tuck it all away in the forums.
Oct 20 2016, 9:44 am
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
My advice was Organizational and of the Presentation of Information. That's 100% HTML.

No, that's just the idea stage. That's like saying you have a great idea for a game and just need someone to code it to the specifications of awesomeness you envisioned. Getting from the idea stage to the implementation stage is not a trivial process.

You did have some specific examples for reorganizing the top menu, but frankly I have no interest in touching that. For the landing page you stayed strictly in the idea phase of things, and yet that would need the most concrete work. And my point was, everyone always has high-concept ideas, but they never have an implementation path for them. This is a problem because of my past experience with website changes, which was never good. Such projects have an overwhelming tendency to blossom out of control, even when the point of focus is something simple.

Besides all that, what Tom and I discovered the hard way was that these runaway website projects only took time away from the software. Our last such project was worthwhile in the sense that it did away with blogs for good and unified the forums onto one system, simplifying a lot of stuff and making the site easier to maintain.

But this isn't to say I think your ideas are bad or that I'm averse to eventually doing something about the landing page, or anything of that sort. What I mean is, website changes have a way of becoming hellish in scope, and structural changes in particular (changing 2 columns to 3 columns for instance, although to be honest I'd prefer a different route entirely) require more effort. The design work that has to go into that is a slog, and the HTML/CSS work for turning that into a reality is a bigger slog. People have no appreciation for this, because they haven't lived it. I'd be much more interested in a comprehensive block of code and maybe a few styles that I could practically drop into place, than a mock-up sketch that suggests what I should put where and leaves me to my own devices.
Oct 20 2016, 11:59 am (Edited on Oct 20 2016, 12:05 pm)
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
No, that's just the idea stage.

You already have the implementation. You already have the main design.

How is it not a "copy and paste needed elements, move links, add text and adjust the values" type job? Oh yeah, the image for the 3rd column. No JavaScript, No CSS, No API stuff.

Lummox JR wrote:
You did have some specific examples for reorganizing the top menu, but frankly I have no interest in touching that.

For every level of friction you lose 20% of users. But, as you wish.

Lummox JR wrote:
For the landing page you stayed strictly in the idea phase of things, and yet that would need the most concrete work.

Sure my ideas aren't the best, but like Orange55 has pointed out, BYOND is outdated with it's information and not just outdated, some are plain unprofessional, which I pointed out.

Lummox JR wrote:
Besides all that, what Tom and I discovered the hard way was that these runaway website projects only took time away from the software.

I'm gonna sound like a **** here in my answer.
Well, that is just logic.

But the presentation of said software and what it is matters. Finalizing how royalties work or how ever you will be doing business officially does matter. Showing what the software can do, even in a very simple way matters. You depend on massive friction for people to learn, that is a horrible way to grow.


Lummox JR wrote:
simplifying a lot of stuff and making the site easier to maintain.

Sounds like that totally failed.


Lummox JR wrote:
What I mean is, website changes have a way of becoming hellish in scope, and structural changes in particular (changing 2 columns to 3 columns for instance, although to be honest I'd prefer a different route entirely) require more effort. The design work that has to go into that is a slog, and the HTML/CSS work for turning that into a reality is a bigger slog.

You have it all already.


Or why don't you just start with the info, like I said, and leave the "structural changes" for a professional later on. Heck, I would practice my long unused web-foo and take your gold and work on it myself if you'd like. Tho I think some people would even do it for free.

Edit: The view source of the main page does not look bad at all.
Oct 20 2016, 12:57 pm
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
Lummox JR wrote:
No, that's just the idea stage.

You already have the implementation. You already have the main design.

How is it not a "copy and paste needed elements, move links, add text and adjust the values" type job? Oh yeah, the image for the 3rd column. No JavaScript, No CSS, No API stuff.

Nothing is ever as simple as just copying and pasting. It sounds that way, but it isn't. I'm not trying to be difficult, but simply repeating what I've said already: you're not appreciating the difficulties involved in even seemingly minor changes. And making one change often sets off a landslide of others. I've been there many times before; I've ridden those landslides.

And honestly, a third column isn't going to do anything positive for the front page, so to me it's not even worth investing the time of trying to dig up an image to use for it. That whole page needs a redesign for sure, but it needs something rather different from what it has now--not more of the same. It needs more flash (small f) to it, more visual interest. I've come up with a few ideas that are half-formed, but that's all. Another user at one point tried to come up with a new layout there, but he quickly ran into the same implementation problems I deal with every time I touch this stuff.

And again, I'm not trying to simply pooh-pooh all website suggestions (except the move-this-over-there variety, because they're seldom worth it). What I am trying to do is inject a sense of realism into the process. Most of the website suggestions I get are high-concept, not worked out on a detailed level. And experience has taught me that unless the details are already handled, or the path to implement them is both obvious and quick, it's a time sink.
Oct 20 2016, 1:10 pm
If someone mocks up a visual design I can shit out a fully coded (front end) site in a few days that lummox can decide to use or not (I'm a web developer so...yeah).
Oct 20 2016, 2:30 pm
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
And honestly, a third column isn't going to do anything positive for the front page,

Seriously flawed business mindset.



You should at least invest some time with the text in your "li" and "p" elements.


Our "realism" seems different, I'll leave it at that.

Good day!
Oct 20 2016, 2:55 pm
Rude.
Oct 20 2016, 3:14 pm
And still Respectful.

=P
Oct 20 2016, 4:40 pm
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
Seriously flawed business mindset.

You should at least invest some time with the text in your "li" and "p" elements.

To replace with what? I've spent hours in the past going over those with Tom. Without a solid plan for such changes, it's a time sink. Throwing time into something when there's no plan but to flail is far worse a mindset than living with a bad status quo.

As I said, I'm in agreement that I'd like to change that page. It does need changing. But a bad change, or a badly thought-out change that requires a great deal of time investment to make it good, would be no better than what's there now.
Oct 20 2016, 7:28 pm (Edited on Oct 20 2016, 7:42 pm)
I think if the landing page is changed then it'd probably be best to enlist outside help, since designing something on par with Unity or GameMaker is far from easy. There's a lot of neat looking games that could be showcased there too (NEStalgia, Epoch, Casual Quest, SS13, Severed, etc). It'd definitely be a massive time sink if it's going to be done right, and contracting a web designer that knows what they're doing when it comes to the visuals would also be necessary.

At this point, I'm not exactly sure if the software needs much else other than improvements in presentation and documentation, maybe. I mean, you have what, almost 20 years put into the engine? Things seem like they're in a good place to me, so maybe focusing on the marketing side of things in the near future isn't a bad idea. Unless there are still features wishlisted that would bring major improvements or are just very desirable, like client FPS and the gamepad foo.
Oct 21 2016, 1:59 am (Edited on Oct 21 2016, 3:45 am)
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
To replace with what?

With answers!

The very main thing I have been pointing out.

You have too many levels of friction to know what BYOND can do and how. And even then, people have to go all the way to ask about it, to even then, get ignored, incomplete or no answer.

If your information does not mean "Yes" or "No", take it out or replace it, and add information. If it sounds like "maybe" or "we will some day" or "working on it", take it out or replace it.

One thing you could do, is make a "Features" page by grabbing the BYOND 101 and Whitepaper, updating them, making them to there simplest form, like a statement and making that the "Features" page.

Are you gonna charge a royalty?
What is it? How does it work?
How can BYOND help me monetize my game?
What tools does it have to help me monetize my game?


Can BYOND make scrolling shooters? Infinite runners? Boardgames, etc...make everything obvious.
Gamepad support? Joysticks?
Audio? 3D audio? Stereo? Mono?


Lummox JR wrote:
I've spent hours in the past going over those with Tom. Without a solid plan for such changes, it's a time sink. Throwing time into something when there's no plan but to flail is far worse a mindset than living with a bad status quo.

It took me less than 5 minutes to get all these questions.
And that is not to brag, that is to show that people are different.

Keep "The Plan" as adding informational value first. This is less than an hour of work for you the one in charge, hiring someone for this, to do it right, would still take your time because you have the information. So, concentrate on information, on the text, then hire someone later to make it pretty. But if you don't have the first part done, don't hire someone to do anything yet.

Lummox JR wrote:
But a bad change, or a badly thought-out change that requires a great deal of time investment to make it good, would be no better than what's there now.

I'm on the mindset of breaking barriers and smoothing out friction, if you want people to use BYOND and create games/apps with DM you need to tell them what it is and what it can do, in the simplest and most accurate form, one click away.(Don't be Nintendo with the Wii U and the Switch, which my first impression is another "failure" like the Wii U.)

And there is no Dan or Tom to get in the way, which means all these things I am talking about are at the easiest ever to do. You are the one, only you can make it official just make it obvious.


Take a break, grab a pen & paper and use a Pomodoro and see how far you can go with that.


Good day!


EDIT: By the way, you should also have a "Work In Progress" List of big feature items for the next Stable version on your "Download" page, just short statements no details, and a statement that links you to your would be "Features" page with all the currently available features.

This is the quickest way to let people know it's being improved upon.

Few HTML, more Text. Less Friction.
Oct 21 2016, 10:03 am
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
Lummox JR wrote:
To replace with what?

With answers!

The very main thing I have been pointing out.

Chosen from which questions? Organized how? Coming up with just the right things to say and putting them together well is a way bigger deal than the complete nothing you make it out to be. And even then, switching to a text-heavier format as you suggest would mean moving around a lot more HTML and doing significant layout work.

When I say--three times now--that you're not appreciating what goes into the implementation side, please understand I actually mean it. I'm speaking from experience. And I've also repeatedly said that high-concept suggestions are not that helpful, because they leave the implementation entirely in my court. You keep talking in generalities and napkin sketches, not in first drafts and proofs of concept.

You have too many levels of friction

You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.

If your information does not mean "Yes" or "No", take it out or replace it, and add information. If it sounds like "maybe" or "we will some day" or "working on it", take it out or replace it.

Replace with what? We're back to napkin sketches.

One thing you could do, is make a "Features" page by grabbing the BYOND 101 and Whitepaper, updating them, making them to there simplest form, like a statement and making that the "Features" page.

Updating them how and with what? Napkin sketch!

Are you gonna charge a royalty?
What is it? How does it work?
How can BYOND help me monetize my game?
What tools does it have to help me monetize my game?

Can BYOND make scrolling shooters? Infinite runners? Boardgames, etc...make everything obvious.
Gamepad support? Joysticks?
Audio? 3D audio? Stereo? Mono?

Those are not first-draft specifics; those are still too general. You're still conflating brainstorming with actual work. Brainstorming is useful, but it isn't even the first stage; it's just coming up with seeds of ideas.

Lummox JR wrote:
I've spent hours in the past going over those with Tom. Without a solid plan for such changes, it's a time sink. Throwing time into something when there's no plan but to flail is far worse a mindset than living with a bad status quo.

It took me less than 5 minutes to get all these questions.
And that is not to brag, that is to show that people are different.

It took you less than five minutes because you did no actual implementation work; you're still brainstorming. I've been trying to point out the difference between the two for days now.

Look, we've gone in circles on this, and we're not going to get anywhere until something I've said actually gets through. There's nothing wrong with coming up with ideas, but insisting I jump on a few of those ideas and run start to finish with them all on my own, and that it should take a trivial amount of time to do so, is not a position based in any kind of reality.
Oct 21 2016, 12:37 pm
It's just HTML.

You are taking things to the extreme. You sound like you want to only over engineer the situation. This is a website, and I only mentioned HTML. You plan content, add content and iterative till you get the look. Fast as heck development. I would do it, for money. Some in the thread said they would do it, sounded like for free.

I did some websites for assignments years ago. Heck, a few months ago I practiced some web-foo on freecodecamp.com, and the main pages source code looks pretty clean. And you aren't even being specific of why it's so much difficult, how is a few elements gonna ruin the whole thing? Reality, it wont. How is even cleaning your text gonna hurt you? You just delete the "maybe" and add a "Yes" on the same element.

Get content.
Put content.
Look at content.
Fix if needed.

You haven't even answered the questions I mentioned, which is proving my point, the answers aren't in the site. I TOOK all these steps to get here and you, the one that knows, the owner, hasn't yet responded with the answers. What should I do? Take another frictional step and repeat myself? Or just move on?



I'll stand by my next comment with my soul.
You are over engineering the hell out of this to the point of impossibility.

Good day!
Oct 21 2016, 12:40 pm
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
frictional

DRINK!
Oct 21 2016, 1:00 pm
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
DRINK!

I don't get it. =/
Oct 21 2016, 5:46 pm
It's just HTML.

If your webpages are just HTML, you need to get back in your Delorian and go back to 1993.

Webpages haven't been "just HTML" for going on two decades now.
Oct 21 2016, 6:13 pm
In response to Ter13
Ter13 wrote:
It's just HTML.

If your webpages are just HTML, you need to get back in your Delorian and go back to 1993.

Webpages haven't been "just HTML" for going on two decades now.

Don't be dissing 93 now. That's when I as a babby was formed.
Oct 22 2016, 2:54 am
My recommendations are just (new) HTML, the "worst" being adding a third table on the main page. No new CSS and no new JavaScript.

You should read before you reply.

Good day!
Oct 22 2016, 7:45 am
In response to 2DExtremeProductions
2DExtremeProductions wrote:
My recommendations are just (new) HTML, the "worst" being adding a third table on the main page. No new CSS and no new JavaScript.

You should read before you reply.

Good day!

The main page is DIV based. A third column REQUIRES css positioning because DIVs are a purely stylesheet-based HTML element.

Your ecomm class probably taught you tabular layouts, which frankly hasn't been a relevant way to build websites since the late 90s.
Oct 22 2016, 8:32 am
I said "new", but alright, let's be illogical to be logical in a fantasy world.
.
.
.
I understand, it is so difficult to position things.
This is impossible.

Let's not do anything, which includes, not answering questions about BYOND itself.

Amazing mindset.

Nothing left to say here.


Good day!
Page: 1 2 3