These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Any word about the old turret icons? (Now with the answer)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Physical Peak
Perkone
Caldari State
#21 - 2011-09-13 22:26:11 UTC
Xander Riggs wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Xander Riggs wrote:
So, what you're saying
Is that icons should be icons, not pictures.

The new pictures do not serve the purpose they're meant to serve — the old icons did. It's that simple.


I am amused that you think a picture cannot be an icon, or that having icon pictures that look like the objects they represent is somehow confusing.


I'm quite honestly astounded you don't get whacked in the mush everyday with your obnoxiousness. The old icons conveyed their meaning very well, the new ones are too ambigious and don't enable the player to instantly differentiate between them.

It's quite simple really, I'd rather have a square and a round image differentating two different things than a octagon and a pentagon......

Get it?
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2011-09-13 22:27:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Grey Stormshadow
Xander Riggs wrote:

Yes, the old ones were low quality. When you see those new icons there? Yeah, that's exactly what it will look like when it's on your ship. I fail to see how this is SO UTTERLY CONFUSING.

I thought gamers were in general afraid of change, but this takes it to a whole new level of absurdity.

Well obviously your and my standards of high quality are different, so we clearly disagree here. That happens a lot to me, but I'll live... :)

Btw... you gotta at least admit that the new icons are way off from line compared to all the other old icons.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
Trolls Troll
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2011-09-13 22:27:42 UTC
its the turret "icons" next to the locked target that get me, they just all look like brown ****.

LittleTerror
Stygian Systems
#24 - 2011-09-13 22:35:33 UTC
Trolls Troll wrote:
its the turret "icons" next to the locked target that get me, they just all look like brown ****.



Your avatar makes me lol loudly, you must have spent countless hours perfecting it, welldone you... Roll
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#25 - 2011-09-13 22:35:50 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Xander Riggs wrote:
I am amused that you think a picture cannot be an icon
So I take it you argue with you optometrist, or every other professional you come across. This is UI design 101. A picture makes a horrible icon for the simple reason that they're not simple. There's too much noise; too much detail; too much useless pixels; too much information loss at different sizes and scales.

If you want to use a picture as a basis for an icon, that's fine, but you will have to refine it something immensely and simplify and refine the defining characteristics to the bare minimums. Otherwise, it fails as an icon.
Quote:
or that having icon pictures that look like the objects they represent is somehow confusing.
Except, of course, that this is not what I'm saying — that's what you're saying.

What I'm saying is that pictures are not icons because they fail to do all the things an icon needs to do.
Quote:
Yes, the old ones were low quality. When you see those new icons there? Yeah, that's exactly what it will look like when it's on your ship. I fail to see how this is SO UTTERLY CONFUSING.
…except, of course, that what they look on your ship is entirely irrelevant for what the icon is there to do. Why are you so confused by having an icon that means “Large Long-range Laser Turret”? Why are you so confused by having an icon that stands out against its background? Why are you so confused by clarity?

So no, the new ones are not of a higher quality — they are of a higher detail level, which actually means they're lower-quality icons.


>apply arbitrary definition of quality
>argue subjective point

Well, at least you're trying to frame the argument. The higher definition icons we use now are better. Full stop.

They look exactly like what they are. So much so that you can even differentiate between weapon subtypes within a given category. They're also color coded for those of us who pay attention to that kind of thing. As I sit here in a station right now cycling through the various weapon types, I can tell at a glance exactly what they are and do. As another poster mentioned: What did you do when you first joined? You didn't know what any of them meant.

All you have to do is pay a modicum of attention for a day or two and you'll have the new icons memorized just like the old ones, and it won't be such a big deal.



"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#26 - 2011-09-13 22:36:22 UTC
…or, to use that old chestnut, let's take the example of the Fire Exit sign.

How do you design one? Well, you don't plaster a picture of Phan Thi Kim Phuc on the door and hope people see the connection. It may contain the right elements (fire, running away, pain…) but its meaning is thoroughly unclear in the heat of a fire.

Instead, you have a highly stylized fire, a highly stylized running man, and an arrow pointing in the right direction. Hell, you could arguably even skip the running man. This conveys in a few very easily recognizable shapes the meaning "Fire? Run! Over there →"

Replacing these icons with pictures of the same things (if at all possible, which is debatable in some cases) does not improve the sign — quite the opposite, because it just adds unnecessary (and even harmful) extra information to process.
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#27 - 2011-09-13 22:36:56 UTC
Grey Stormshadow wrote:
Xander Riggs wrote:

Yes, the old ones were low quality. When you see those new icons there? Yeah, that's exactly what it will look like when it's on your ship. I fail to see how this is SO UTTERLY CONFUSING.

I thought gamers were in general afraid of change, but this takes it to a whole new level of absurdity.

Well obviously your and my standards of high quality are different, so we clearly disagree here. That happens a lot to me, but I'll live... :)

Btw... you gotta at least admit that the new icons are way off from line compared to all the other old icons.


I was under the impression that all icons would get the photorealistic overhaul eventually.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#28 - 2011-09-13 22:37:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…or, to use that old chestnut, let's take the example of the Fire Exit sign.

How do you design one? Well, you don't plaster a picture of Phan Thi Kim Phuc on the door and hope people see the connection. It may contain the right elements (fire, running away, pain…) but its meaning is thoroughly unclear in the heat of a fire.

Instead, you have a highly stylized fire, a highly stylized running man, and an arrow pointing in the right direction. Hell, you could arguably even skip the running man. This conveys in a few very easily recognizable shapes the meaning "Fire? Run! Over there →"

Replacing these icons with pictures of the same things (if at all possible, which is debatable in some cases) does not improve the sign — quite the opposite, because it just adds unnecessary (and even harmful) extra information to process.


Next time you fit your ship in a smoke filled room as you dive out a window, you let me know.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#29 - 2011-09-13 22:39:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Xander Riggs wrote:
The higher definition icons we use now are better.
In what way?
Quote:
They look exactly like what they are.
So what? What use is that?

They also blend in with the background much better. This is bad.
They also scale very poorly. This is bad.
They also offer very little contrast. This is bad.
Quote:
They're also color coded for those of us who pay attention to that kind of thing. As I sit here in a station right now cycling through the various weapon types, I can tell at a glance exactly what they are and do.
…all of which you could do with the old icons. All the new ones offer is fidelity, which is an almost entirely worthless property for an icon.
Quote:
I was under the impression that all icons would get the photorealistic overhaul eventually.
Seeing as how most icons have no in-game item to photorealistically represent, that sounds not just implausible, but entirely impossible.
Quote:
Next time you fit your ship in a smoke filled room as you dive out a window, you let me know.
So you agree, then, that pictures are not good icons. Well, that's progress at least…
BLACK-STAR
#30 - 2011-09-13 22:45:22 UTC  |  Edited by: BLACK-STAR
It has been a couple months already, and we still have heavily pixelated icons and it's not that professional. The art team should probably be embarrassed about it. however I would appreciate a new set redone set, to look more modern.


Meryl SinGarda wrote:
You're telling me you'd rather go back to the old, lower quality icons, because you don't have the ability to learn how to distinguish between different things. What did you do when you originally started playing and had no idea what any of these icons meant?

Case closed, /thread.

Straight

Meryl SinGarda actually meant to say, so instead wrote:
I'm a bit ignorant and can't comprehend common sense mostly ever.

you accidently the rum and coke again?
LittleTerror
Stygian Systems
#31 - 2011-09-13 22:45:48 UTC  |  Edited by: LittleTerror
What is wrong with the new icons you ungrateful things?

I like them, to me they work fine, sure I have to relearn what is what but that is it because dur it a new image so it looks different but you people who don't like them are trying to use fake logic to state they are bad with out even trying to learn the new way of identification.

your brain

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ffmRRXM1L._SL500_AA300_.jpg
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#32 - 2011-09-13 22:47:59 UTC
LittleTerror wrote:
What is wrong with the new icons you ungrateful things?
They're not good icons. They lack everything a good icon should have, unlike the old icons (which, at most, were a bit weak in terms of contrast).
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#33 - 2011-09-13 22:48:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
...not good icons. Well, that's progress at least…


Important note: Capital laser batteries do not actually exist, either. You know what they do with the art, when they make new icons for things inside your ship? MAKE IT UP. Joys of fiction, right there.

Your bad points are entirely arbitrary. You think they offer no contrast. I think they're fine. You think they blend in with the background. I don't. You think they scale poorly. I don't. They look just fine in the market window, beside the target locked, and on my ship.

Literally, you're sitting here saying 'Hey, CCP! I know you spent money and time on this and all, but I don't like it. You should waste some more money to meet my entirely arbitrary art-school list of demands.'

I did get a good laugh when you specifically questioned why it's good for icons to actually look like stuff, though.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#34 - 2011-09-13 22:52:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Xander Riggs wrote:
Important note: Capital laser batteries do not actually exist, either.
And this is important, why exactly?
Quote:
You know what they do with the art, when they make new icons for things inside your ship? MAKE IT UP.
So?
Quote:
Your bad points are entirely arbitrary.
No. They follow the principles of good UI (and specifically icon) design. It's not so much arbitrary as the result of at least two entire fields of research and a small country's GDP worth of money that has gone into R&D at companies such as Microsoft, Google, and Apple.
Quote:
Literally, you're sitting here saying 'Hey, CCP! I know you spent money and time on this and all, but I don't like it. You should waste some more money to meet my entirely arbitrary art-school list of demands.'
No, that's as usual not at all what I'm saying, but nice try on your… what is it? Fortieth?… straw man of the thread.

I'm saying “Hey, CCP. You shouldn't have wasted that money and time on this deterioration. You can fix it at zero cost because you already have the assets.” And maybe, as an addendum “look at that waste as a the cost of learning — think about the reason why before you change things the next time.”
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#35 - 2011-09-13 23:00:40 UTC
Tippia wrote:
So?



Sums it all up, right there.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2011-09-13 23:01:30 UTC
Xander Riggs wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So?
Sums it all up, right there.
So you agree then. Good.

CCP, give us back the oldactual turret icons.
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#37 - 2011-09-13 23:03:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Xander Riggs wrote:
ITT: Easily confused people.
No. ITT: people who dislike functional deterioration (because that's what has happened — the new icons pictures are functionally inferior to the old (actual) icons).

…and I don't see the need to create new new ones, when there already exists a full set of icons that match the prevalent UI design. Just go back to using those (and send the person who decided to ditch the icons for pictures as UI elements to a basic class in HMI design).


current 'awesome' icons are bulllshit. fix them pls, BY REDACTING ****** CHANGES THANKS

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Xander Riggs
Slamtown Federation
#38 - 2011-09-13 23:08:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Xander Riggs wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So?
Sums it all up, right there.
So you agree then. Good.

CCP, give us back the oldactual turret icons.


Oh, not in the slightest, but you'll just keep saying my arguments are straw men while you spout unfounded claims of your own, so I'm content to let sleeping dogs lie and agree to disagree.

"A man with a drone-boat has nothing but time on his hands."
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2011-09-13 23:11:24 UTC
I start to get the feeling that Xander photoshopped these images for us from the actual models and now he doesn't want them to get trashed. Clear CCP alt spotted. Tinhat on. There is no spoon.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#40 - 2011-09-13 23:11:52 UTC
Xander Riggs wrote:
you'll just keep saying my arguments are straw men
Only if you keep making straw man arguments by arguing claims I don't make.
Quote:
while you spout unfounded claims of your own
It's not entirely unfounded to think that you agree when you can't evade arguments rather than counter them, and when you can't answer even very simple questions…