Game room redesign

[uncle]

I think that the design of the game room screen needs to be changed a little bit. This is my idea:



Suggested features:

• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=7999.0 - drop down menus
• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=7981.0 - network reliability indicators
• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8003.0 - game room bell
• The background should be partially transparent.
• The map preview should not make a rectangle map look like a square. The map with a different size should be resized and fitted in the square

Other:

• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8046.0 - user polls
• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8026.0 - in-game chat - suggestions
• https://forum.megaglest.org/index.php?topic=8035.0 - chat - sound played when user mentioned

What do you think about it?
I hope that this suggestion will help the devs to improve the current design.

[tomreyn]

I generally like it. Can you fit this into 800x600 and, at the same time, not look bad on 1680x1050? And will it still be readable on 800x600? Can you make sure all the advanced options will fit on this screen?

Many designs will be possible once drop down menus and other new GUI elements can be properly implemented - which isn't neccessarily easy. For example,properly implemented drop down menus only list as many options as fit on screen, are not cut off on the bottom of the screen and may extend to towards the top of the screen if the bottom does not provide enough space. They also render fine on any supported resolution. I guess a revamped GUI is only really possible if we can come up with a somewhat slick and well maintained generic GUI library.

[Omega]

The 'drop down menu in a drop down menu' is a bit... ugh. And two drop down menus inside the same element of the drop down menu is a touch much.

[uncle]

Can you fit this into 800x600 and, at the same time, not look bad on 1680x1050? And will it still be readable on 800x600? Can you make sure all the advanced options will fit on this screen?

Well, like in HTML and CSS, there can be relative widths and heights specified using %.

Also, is it really necessary to optimize the screen for resolution 800x600 (until the game will be portable to Android or other OS for tablets)?

The 'drop down menu in a drop down menu' is a bit... ugh. And two drop down menus inside the same element of the drop down menu is a touch much.

Yeah, that's because I could not come up with something better at the moment.
We can use something like this instead:

Code: [Select]

CPU -> Easy
  -> Ultra
  ->  Mega -> 1.0
           -> 1.5
           -> 2.0
           -> etc.

[treba]

hey. afaik (mega)glest is still using GLUT, which will not get any signicant new features in the foreseeable feature.
i was wondering if the devs had a look into CEGUI, which seems to be perfect for our needs in my eyes. are there any strong arguments against it?

edit: ok, i don't know if the first line above makes any sense as i confused GLUT with GLUI. the later could also be an option imo, although it's been some time since the last release. but it seems to be stable and easy to use and implent.

[tomreyn]

Can you fit this into 800x600 and, at the same time, not look bad on 1680x1050? And will it still be readable on 800x600? Can you make sure all the advanced options will fit on this screen?

Well, like in HTML and CSS, there can be relative widths and heights specified using %.

I don't think this is possible yet, but I agree it's a property a redesigned GUI could (and if by all means possible, should) have.

Also, is it really necessary to optimize the screen for resolution 800x600 (until the game will be portable to Android or other OS for tablets)?

You're right, it's not. For now I guess the minimum resolution which works fine should be 1024x600, which is widespread on netbooks and some subnotebooks, some of which work for running MegaGlest.

[Coldfusionstorm]

I like it, and the thing about dropdowns inside a dropdown, its okay, just make it aligned good, and make sure that you can only chose difficulty and Multiplier when you have selected wich CPU you want(or wich human want multiplier).

If people want multiplier the host should set it for them, it would give too much confusion and debate if players could set it individually.

[TotalNoob]

I think we should also consider 800x600 resolution. Making work now reduces work later doing the same again.

[Omega]

I think we should also consider 800x600 resolution. Making work now reduces work later doing the same again.

In this day and age, does anything (that can run  MegaGlest) really use such a miserable resolution? Even the pitful netbooks I like to poke fun at usually sport at least 1024x600, as Tom pointed out (heck, even the iPad, with it's tiny 9.7" screen, has a 1024x768 resolution). Restraining us to tiny resolutions that are no longer practical limit our menu options.

[treba]

comming back to the widget question (which will maybe already take care of the resolution problem), i want to bring up CEGUI again. here are a few more screenshots, and although not being to pretty, they show what the library is able to.

(click to show/hide)

what do you think about it?

[tomreyn]

I don't like this design too much, but if this can be modified and CEGUI works out programmatically and fits in then it could be a good option.

But really Titi and Softcoder need to comment on this.

[Omega]

I don't like this design too much, but if this can be modified

Take a look for yourself.

[Coldfusionstorm]

Isnt this also what GaE uses?, that would be fantastic to have cross engine compability.

[tomreyn]

I don't like this design too much, but if this can be modified

Take a look for yourself.

This seems to show exactly one alternative look (skin), which seems to have been created by the same developer as CEGUI itself. But there is a skin repository which currently lists 7 skins, some of which are compatible with the current version of CEGUI, so there's more than one.

This one looks nice and very different to the original:



It may not be suitable for MegaGlest, but it shows that variation is possible.

Isnt this also what GaE uses?, that would be fantastic to have cross engine compability.

To my knowledge silnarm has written his own (which I bet is quite some overhead to maintain).

[uncle]

If this could be implemented instead the current design (but with the same colors etc.), it would be great. A lot of space could be saved by using separate windows with settings.

[will]

I would favour adopting the gae widgit framework

[Omega]

I would favour adopting the gae widgit framework

This. It's completely modifiable (and isn't hard coded), has already been extensively tested and adapted for Glest, and it looks Glesty. The license works, and it's more than suitable.

[Coldfusionstorm]

Can only agree with will and omega.

Howver titi and softcoder is taking a break, so this isn't likely to happen for some time.

[victorj]

It would be nice to have it  , mainly because it takes too long to find the map you want, with a huge amount of maps ... in MegaGlest. Some features of GAE should be aggregated megaglest yes, I liked the GAE design, design for to add in Megaglest. 

[tomreyn]

I discussed this with Titi a while ago because I have no idea how much work would be involved to get this done, and I think he told me that with the current codebase it would require rewriting/rearranging large parts of the code (i.e. weeks of full time work) to add a serious presentation layer. So, while I would really, really, like to see a better UI, and automatic word wrapping, at least Titi (and I assume Softcoder either) are not going to be able to do it.

[wciow]

I have no problem with the current main menu GUI, but MG needs a drop down menu on the map selection for functional rather than aesthetic reasons. Currently it takes ages to scroll through the dozens of maps to the one you want and this will only get worse with more maps!

Also there is an annoying lag of about half a second when switching maps in multiplayer.