View Full Version : Can we talk about Green UI?
I understand, for the sake of preserving the classic experience, the rationale behind barring people from using custom UI's during the beta and at launch.
That being said, the current UI is garbage. The farthest thing from Classic that I can possibly imagine. In fact it calls to mind my time during Luclin.
I was very excited when I first logged in and saw this close-to-classic recreation of the character creation UI.. Only to be greeted by black transparent windows with no texturing whatsoever on the in-game ui. So of course I naturally flipped through several of the in-built options for UI files as well as downloading the "classic" recration on Welgrim's site-- ya know, the bluish-grey stone texture? Only to find none of them work.
So again, I understand the lack of support for customizable UI's-- But if you're going to prohibit them to preserve the classic atmosphere, why would you also shove the farthest thing from a classic UI down our throat?
zaneosak
10-16-2019, 08:36 PM
they said the titanium client doesn't allow the classic 20% of your screen is playable space UI so they were going to use the first available UI that still exists, The velious transparent one, then they decided to add in classic elements to that UI to try to get some kind of classic feel to it (marbling, 6 buttons, inventory screen replicated spacing, comparable main page button)
El-Hefe
10-16-2019, 08:36 PM
The transparent windows are day 1 classic.
So... maybe do research before declaring something is "The farthest thing from classic"?
Baler
10-16-2019, 08:39 PM
Just hit F10
And just fort the sake of visualization,
this
https://i.imgur.com/L01DCyv.png
is totally kosher.
While this
http://p99.yourfirefly.com/downloads/classic1.3.jpg
is not.
The transparent windows are day 1 classic.
So... maybe do research before declaring something is "The farthest thing from classic"?
nah man, I remember the game from way back int he day. The UI had a gray/blue stone-looking texture with sandstone colored buttons.
they said the titanium client doesn't allow the classic 20% of your screen is playable space UI so they were going to use the first available UI that still exists, The velious transparent one, then they decided to add in classic elements to that UI to try to get some kind of classic feel to it (marbling, 6 buttons, inventory screen replicated spacing, comparable main page button)
I see no way to obtain the marbling. That I would b e happy with. All I see now is transparent black with sandstone-colored buttons. I've fiddled with alpha, transparency, texturing.. none of it added the effect you're speaking about. It only allowed for the changing of black to the likes of RBYGW, and various mixtures.
El-Hefe
10-16-2019, 08:44 PM
nah man, I remember the game from way back int he day. The UI had a gray/blue stone-looking texture with sandstone colored buttons.
and then you hit F10 and it brought up the clear UI.
https://i.imgur.com/NoD2zX5.png
Screenshot dated 7/99
Shits classic AF.
and then you hit F10 and it brought up the clear UI.
https://i.imgur.com/NoD2zX5.png
Screenshot dated 7/99
Shits classic AF.
Sorry, that's not correct. It may have been an option at launch, but it was not the default UI. In fact the bulk of the screen was taken up by that blue-stone appearance back in the day. All of the UI elements were built around the playable screen space in a fixed position.
http://www.troublesbraids.net/old_eq/palor_bb.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/F0ErchwGqR8/hqdefault.jpg
I understand that as others have pointed out, that specific UI is not possible int he titanium client. But the point I am making is that if you're not able to have an actual classic UI, why force the current iteration down the throat of the userbase?
Ashenden
10-16-2019, 08:51 PM
Well the client this runs on can't do that, and as such you're forced to use the alternative option that existed at the same time. Sorry.
omgmo
10-16-2019, 08:53 PM
OP, your answers are in the first stickied post in this forum.
El-Hefe
10-16-2019, 08:54 PM
Well, there are two classic UIs, one that can’t run on the Titanium client and one that can.
Green uses the one that can, it’s that simple.
Well the client this runs on can't do that, and as such you're forced to use the alternative option that existed at the same time. Sorry.
Again, the entire point is that there are better alternatives to the current iterations black/transparent options.
Well, there are two classic UIs, one that can’t run on the Titanium client and one that can.
Green uses the one that can, it’s that simple.
that's a funny way of admitting you were incorrect lol
aaezil
10-16-2019, 08:57 PM
The current green ui iteration is almost exactly the classic velious launch UI. The original eq launch ui wont work due to technical limitations unfortunately i wish we could have it.
The current green ui iteration is almost exactly the classic velious launch UI. The original eq launch ui wont work due to technical limitations unfortunately i wish we could have it.
classic velious, you nailed it on the head.
My point is not that they should implement the original classic UI in it's entirety (being that it's not possible)
but should not be forcing something that's from 3 years later down our throats-- how on earth can they get off forcing something entirely NOT classic down our throats..for the sake of "keeping it classic" it's a crock of ish lol.
shit's classic, amirite?
https://i.imgur.com/RxeSj4G.png
zaneosak
10-16-2019, 09:10 PM
classic velious, you nailed it on the head.
My point is not that they should implement the original classic UI in it's entirety (being that it's not possible)
but should not be forcing something that's from 3 years later down our throats-- how on earth can they get off forcing something entirely NOT classic down our throats..for the sake of "keeping it classic" it's a crock of ish lol.
shit's classic, amirite?
https://i.imgur.com/RxeSj4G.png
I mean you do a really good job with your color textures to make the UI look at BAD as you possibly can to really get the optics quick look win of your argument. Mine looks nothing like that at all. Mine looks like the old school F10 UI mixed with the Velious UI. Both transparent, but one has a lot more added functionality than the other did. It's a combination of both.
Putting rainbow textures or butt fucking ugly gray textures on every window is something that <1% of the players are going to do, nobody is gonna purposely make the ui worse looking... well except for you when you're trying to falsely show that that's the way it looks :P
omgmo
10-16-2019, 09:10 PM
classic velious, you nailed it on the head.
My point is not that they should implement the original classic UI in it's entirety (being that it's not possible)
but should not be forcing something that's from 3 years later down our throats-- how on earth can they get off forcing something entirely NOT classic down our throats..for the sake of "keeping it classic" it's a crock of ish lol.
shit's classic, amirite?
https://i.imgur.com/RxeSj4G.png
Since you refuse to read other threads: That is not the final UI, the bulk of the changes aren't done yet, and changes will even continue after launch day. If you would just read the damn forums you would have your answers. Why would you insist on wasting more of your own (and other peoples) time creating this waste of a thread than it would take to look for the answer that is right infront of you.
Since you refuse to read other threads: That is not the final UI, the bulk of the changes aren't done yet, and changes will even continue after launch day. If you would just read the damn forums you would have your answers. Why would you insist on wasting more of your own (and other peoples) time creating this waste of a thread than it would take to look for the answer that is right infront of you.
I'm not wasting my time. I came here to talk about it. I wanted to make this post. And so I did. You chose to come here and get involved, that's a choice you made to waste your own time, don't put responsibility for your inability to keep to yourself on me.
I mean you do a really good job with your color textures to make the UI look at BAD as you possibly can to really get the optics quick look win of your argument. Mine looks nothing like that at all. Mine looks like the old school F10 UI mixed with the Velious UI. Both transparent, but one has a lot more added functionality than the other did. It's a combination of both.
Putting rainbow textures or butt fucking ugly gray textures on every window is something that <1% of the players are going to do, nobody is gonna purposely make the ui worse looking... well except for you when you're trying to falsely show that that's the way it looks :P
nah I was trying to replicate the stone-coloration of the clssic UI as well as have some definiteion between elements in the various windows. Black lines on black UI bcakground = no definition, cant see what is what.
My entire point was that by coloring it grey in a low effort (and more importantly: IMPLEMENTABLE BY CURRENT SERVER RULES) attempt to get the ui elements as close to classic as possible.
If we're going by day 1 rules and standards, including disallowing 3rd party UIs.. why are we being forced to use the UI from velious?
El-Hefe
10-16-2019, 09:19 PM
OP, have you even downloaded the UI you keep saying is a better classic option? I have, it’s a fucking mess. It is not in any way a better option.
OP, have you even downloaded the UI you keep saying is a better classic option? I have, it’s a fucking mess. It is not in any way a better option.
You are correct, the implementation of Welgrim's is not ideal, but there are others that simply add it's texturing/coloration to the current UI-- but they aren't allowed either.
zaneosak
10-16-2019, 09:28 PM
If we're going by day 1 rules and standards, including disallowing 3rd party UIs.. why are we being forced to use the UI from velious?
So basically you want no 3rd party UIs because that isn't classic, and you want no velious UI because it's not classic but you want to somehow still play Green? Using your formula that means no Green my dude. No Custom UIs have recreated the exact Classic UI. The one you screenshotted is not classic UI either.
They tried to find some middle ground, it isn't good enough for you, so I would say your solution would be to just not play Green and you won't be as upset.
So basically you want no 3rd party UIs because that isn't classic, and you want no velious UI because it's not classic but you want to somehow still play Green? Using your formula that means no Green my dude. No Custom UIs have recreated the exact Classic UI. The one you screenshotted is not classic UI either.
They tried to find some middle ground, it isn't good enough for you, so I would say your solution would be to just not play Green and you won't be as upset.
nope I just want consistency-- if we're not going to be able to have a true classic UI don't force the current iteration upon us for the sake of keeping it classic
They did a good job with character creation, and the spellbook-- I will say that. Why can't they simply implement the same graphical effects to the rest of the UI?
https://i.imgur.com/JHQFd1E.png
zaneosak
10-16-2019, 09:35 PM
nope I just want consistency-- if we're not going to be able to have a true classic UI don't force the current iteration upon us for the sake of keeping it classic
They did a good job with character creation, and the spellbook-- I will say that. Why can't they simply implement the same graphical effects to the rest of the UI?
They said they wanted to emulate the Velious UI , which is similar version of the classic transparent UIs, its in the green announcment and the forum thread about the UI
El-Hefe
10-16-2019, 09:40 PM
OP, have you even downloaded the UI you keep saying is a better classic option? I have, it’s a fucking mess. It is not in any way a better option.
You are correct, the implementation of Welgrim's is not ideal, but there are others that simply add it's texturing/coloration to the current UI-- but that isn't allowed either.
Because the current UI isn’t classic, even if you gave it a classic color.
In a perfect world, you would have two options: Stone viewport UI and the current Green99 UI and you’d be able to switch between them by pressing F10. That’s how it was when EQ launched. Since the devs can’t yet implement the stone viewport UI, it makes sense to only allow the single classic UI they have available at the moment.
Hopefully in the future you’ll get to use the old stone viewport UI that you so clearly are dying to use. I don’t doubt that it’ll be an option in future.
Because the current UI isn’t classic, even if you gave it a classic color.
In a perfect world, you would have two options: Stone viewport UI and the current Green99 UI and you’d be able to switch between them by pressing F10. That’s how it was when EQ launched. Since the devs can’t yet implement the stone viewport UI, it makes sense to only allow the single classic UI they have available at the moment.
Hopefully in the future you’ll get to use the old stone viewport UI that you so clearly are dying to use. I don’t doubt that it’ll be an option in future.
Honestly I'd be happy enough if they simply converted the transparent elements to match the likes of the spellbook/character creation/bank/trade menu. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the patchnotes/what you guys are saying and that is what is to come?
https://i.imgur.com/mUqRiZK.png
Wenai
10-16-2019, 09:43 PM
OK. I keep seeing a lot of conversation about the Stone UI. The enforcement of the Velious UI was announced a while back. We just simply started a project only a few weeks ago attempting to improve on the UI they had chosen to use (it has been distributed in patch files for quite a while).
Now what are some of the issues with the Stone UI? See the linked image.
https://i.imgur.com/lWB5U9F.png
Now. Can these issues be overcome? Yep absolutely!
EverQuest supports custom viewports, so realistically you could define a 4:3 view port, and place your stone elements around the view port and never lose any visibility. That is 100% possible. However... and this is a huge however.
The majority of the community can't even figure out how to set solid backgrounds on their Velious UI elements. So the idea of forcing an obstructive opaque UI on people, of which I would guess 95% wouldn't be able to figure out, or even attempt to get a proper ViewPort working sounds like a terrible idea to me.
At the end of the day there was a "Velious-style" UI available at launch in the F10 Full Screen. It lacked a LOT of functionality compared to the Stone UI. The Velious UI simply added all of that functionality to the F10 Full Screen UI. So the Velious UI is honestly the best, least-hassle option available for people to use. We were able to find lots of resources showing tons of marble windows were present in the Velious UI and we have implemented most of them!
I also want to stress that I have NO control over which UI is forced for Green. I simply helped to improve what was being forced. :)
lordpazuzu
10-16-2019, 09:45 PM
The transparent windows are straight up classic. They weren't an option that became available later, they were there day one. I played that way since the marble UI took up most of my screen. I don't know why you're calling it the "velious ui" when it was available at launch.
deadlycupcakez
10-16-2019, 09:46 PM
Classic memories are drugs. OP has no idea about the work staff is doing to recreate the classic stone UI or when the UI being used came out. Watch OG Velious release trailers and you will see the UI you are complaining about being used. So not that UN-classic... fucking moron.
Velious release --- fucking moron.
The only two bits of what you said that are worth reading.
Ashenden
10-16-2019, 09:58 PM
The only two bits of what you said that are worth reading.
I appreciate that you quote that guy who is technically wrong while ignoring the one right above him that states they were there day one of EverQuest. Bravo.
I appreciate that you quote that guy who is technically wrong while ignoring the one right above him that states they were there day one of EverQuest. Bravo.
because one guy says it's day 1 classic, most others have said it's velious clsasic and the "closest to true classic titanium will allow"
a low-res screenshot doesn't prove the timeline by which the UI in question came out-- whereas the gentlemoron I was quoting states there are, currently available, Velious release trailers that display the current UI and as such "it's classic".
All I'm saying is that there should be some consistency. If the granite background can exist in the trade/bank/character creation elements, it can be applied to the inventory, chat, hotkeys etc.
Looks like garbage to have one next to the other.
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:06 PM
because one guy says it's day 1 classic, most others have said it's velious clsasic and the "closest to true classic titanium will allow"
a low-res screenshot doesn't prove the timeline by which the UI in question came out-- whereas the gentlemoron I was quoting states there are, currently available, Velious release trailers that display the current UI and as such "it's classic".
All I'm saying is that there should be some consistency. If the granite background can exist in the trade/bank/character creation elements, it can be applied to the inventory, chat, hotkeys etc.
Looks like garbage to have one next to the other.
What are you hoping to achieve with all this whining ... besides annoying virtually everyone here with your complete lack of respect or appreciation for everyone's 100% volunteer effort?
I mean do you seriously think Rogean and Nilbog are going to read your posts and say "You know what? FUCK CLASSIC! Let's allow any UI anyone wants, and while we're add it let's add Luclin and allow boxing!" Because that's not going to happen.
Are you thinking that by insulting them you'll convince the (again, 100% volunteers) who made the current Green UI to throw it out, and use Vert or Duxa UI instead? Again, not going to happen.
Besides just bothering everyone with your rudeness, what's your goal here?
Ashenden
10-16-2019, 10:08 PM
because one guy says it's day 1 classic, most others have said it's velious clsasic and the "closest to true classic titanium will allow"
a low-res screenshot doesn't prove the timeline by which the UI in question came out-- whereas the gentlemoron I was quoting states there are, currently available, Velious release trailers that display the current UI and as such "it's classic".
All I'm saying is that there should be some consistency. If the granite background can exist in the trade/bank/character creation elements, it can be applied to the inventory, chat, hotkeys etc.
Looks like garbage to have one next to the other.
One guy named Rogean.
Clearly you are or were unaware that you could F10 in classic for the transparent UI, at all times.
Again, see here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/Sand_Giant_-_EverQuest_-_1999.jpg
Oh hey, here's Nilbog saying the same thing with a dated screenshot of it. Where the heck did that come from?
?
Here is a screenshot with a modified date of 7/20/1999.
This UI functionality was available day 1 of release.
https://i.imgur.com/NoD2zX5.png
This patch removed the necessity of clicking the 'Meditate' button itself located on the spellbook.
Then, in 2002:
Danth
10-16-2019, 10:10 PM
because one guy says it's day 1 classic, most others have said it's velious clsasic and the "closest to true classic titanium will allow"
Alright, here's a more detailed explanation:
Original EQ had an F10 option to change the display from the "stone UI" we all know and love to a fullscreen with some translucent rendered UI elements. It had only limited functionality but it was there. With the launch of the velious expansion, that F10 mode was greatly expanded in its capabilities to be more usable fulltime, although it still reverted to the "stone" UI for a number of windows. This is why we're calling it the "Velious UI", even though some of its elements were present in the game from day 1.
Danth
What are you hoping to achieve with all this whining ... besides annoying virtually everyone here with your complete lack of respect or appreciation for everyone's 100% volunteer effort?
I mean do you seriously think Rogean and Nilbog are going to read your posts and say "You know what? FUCK CLASSIC! Let's allow any UI anyone wants, and while we're add it let's add Luclin and allow boxing!" Because that's not going to happen.
Are you thinking that by insulting them you'll convince the (again, 100% volunteers) who made the current Green UI to throw it out, and use Vert or Duxa UI instead? Again, not going to happen.
Besides just bothering everyone with your rudeness, what's your goal here?
Honestly I've never used duxa or vert, I simply mentioned them because they are available in one of the easiest to obtain torrents containing the game files.
I've stated before, all I'm saying is that there should be some consistency. In the current UI there are excellent examples of UI elements that bridge the gap between classic-stone and the current iteration.. but to disallow the usage of UI files that would allow their implementation? it's silly.
Ivory
10-16-2019, 10:12 PM
Here's the thing...most people didn't play f10 in the "totally classic semi transparent black boxes of boring".
Yea, having a "classic feeling recreation" isn't 100% classic...BUT it is a LOT closer to the CLASSIC FEELING than these black boxes.
THIS is classic UI..... what people remember of EQ....not a cold black box found in some obscure 2ndary mode.....but classic late 90's roleplaying design that tried to draw the player in with a more comforting design.
Even if the "true classic UI" isn't possible....AT LEAST give something SOMEWHAT along those lines. Capture the feeling...not just shrug and go "well, not possible, so let's go for this 2ndary mode that looks ugly"
It's absolutely killing the feel of a classic EQ experience.
https://imgur.com/40CC2j6.jpg
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:13 PM
Alright, here's a more detailed explanation:
Original EQ had an F10 option to change the display from the "stone UI" we all know and love to a fullscreen with some translucent rendered UI elements. It had only limited functionality but it was there. With the launch of the velious expansion, that F10 mode was greatly expanded in its capabilities to be more usable fulltime, although it still reverted to the "stone" UI for a number of windows. This is why we're calling it the "Velious UI", even though some of its elements were present in the game from day 1.
Danth
Great explanation, I added it (in slightly tweaked form to fit the page) to: http://wiki.project1999.com/Green_UI
Also rather than rehash this whole conversation with every new poster who says "the UI isn't classic", I strongly encourage everyone to just refer said poster to that wiki page. And if you don't think that page answers everything ... improve it: it's a wiki! :)
Here's the thing...most people didn't play f10 in the "totally classic semi transparent black boxes of boring".
Yea, having a "classic feeling recreation" isn't 100% classic...BUT it is a LOT closer to the CLASSIC FEELING than these black boxes.
THIS is classic UI..... what people remember of EQ....not a cold black box found in some obscure 2ndary mode.....but classic late 90's roleplaying design that tried to draw the player in with a more comforting design.
Even if the "true classic UI" isn't possible....AT LEAST give something SOMEWHAT along those lines. Capture the feeling...not just shrug and go "well, not possible, so let's go for this 2ndary mode that looks ugly"
It's absolutely killing the feel of a classic EQ experience.
https://imgur.com/40CC2j6.jpg
Yeah seems funny to me that they are expending effort implementing the current iteration that most people don't care that much for when they could simply add texturing to the background of the UI elements to at least give them a similar look.
Again, the bank, trade, spellbook, char creation all are wonderful-- Now if they'd replicate that for the remainder of the elements, rather than focusing on "f10 classic" I think there are very few who would have any cause for complaint. The textured buttons on the sleek transparent background look silly. The textured windows mentioned above next to the untextured inventory etc; look like ass.
the titanium-era ui is preferable to this mish mash of "classic transparent" that is currently in use.
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:17 PM
Here's the thing...most people didn't play f10 in the "totally classic semi transparent black boxes of boring".
Yea, having a "classic feeling recreation" isn't 100% classic...BUT it is a LOT closer to the CLASSIC FEELING than these black boxes.
THIS is classic UI..... what people remember of EQ....not a cold black box found in some obscure 2ndary mode.....but classic late 90's roleplaying design that tried to draw the player in with a more comforting design.
Even if the "true classic UI" isn't possible....AT LEAST give something SOMEWHAT along those lines. Capture the feeling...not just shrug and go "well, not possible, so let's go for this 2ndary mode that looks ugly
I think you're vastly underestimated the ease and viability of converting a full-screen UI mode designed for like 1024x768 max (or maybe 1280x1024?) into a 100% full-visible area UI with panes on it, which works even on giant 1920x1600 or larger resolutions.
Or if I'm wrong, make a mock up. I don't even mean spend all the time and effort our volunteer team did, I mean just get Paint or Photoshop or whatever and make a version of the UI that looks like what you want.
Then make one for every other resolution people commonly play at these days, share all of them, and if you can pull it off I personally will be convinced and take your side :) But I suspect what you'll find is, it's harder than it sounds.
Also, really your beef is with Rogean and Nilbog: everyone involved in the UI was trying to make what they wanted.
Danth
10-16-2019, 10:17 PM
Here's the thing...most people didn't play f10 in the "totally classic semi transparent black boxes of boring".
I love that old UI too, but it is problematic on modern monitors. You cannot stretch it to widescreen without screwing it up somehow, for one. Even getting any kind of implementation to work right at all on Titanium requires some fairly technical, user-initiated /viewport commands (can't do it automatically with any known process) beyond the knowledge or ability of many users. P1999's admins were quite insistent that they want classic-as-practical EQ, but classic-as-practical EQ that'll work well on modern hardware.
Danth
I think you're vastly underestimated the ease and viability of converting a full-screen UI mode designed for like 1024x768 max (or maybe 1280x1024?) to a 100% viewport-based UI with panes on it, which works even on giant 1920x1600 or larger resolutions.
Or if I'm wrong, make a mock up. I don't even mean spend all the time and effort our volunteer team did, I mean just get Paint or Photoshop or whatever and make a version of the UI that looks like what you want.
Then make one for every other resolution people commonly play at these days, share all of them, and if you can pull it off I personally will be convinced and take your side :)
You're literally ignoring the bits where both they and I admit that since it's not feasible to literally recreate it, that they could simply bridge the gap between that and what is available presently-- make the Bank/trade/spellbook cohesive with the spellbar/hotkeys/inventory etc.
kylok
10-16-2019, 10:19 PM
Yeah seems funny to me that they are expending effort implementing the current iteration that most people don't care that much for when they could simply add texturing to the background of the UI elements to at least give them a similar look.
Again, the bank, trade, spellbook, char creation all are wonderful-- Now if they'd replicate that for the remainder of the elements, rather than focusing on "f10 classic" I think there are very few who would have any cause for complaint. The textured buttons on the sleek transparent background look silly. The textured windows mentioned above next to the untextured inventory etc; look like ass.
the titanium-era ui is preferable to this mish mash of "classic transparent" that is currently in use.
I don't believe this is correct - in fact quite the opposite. If the marble UI were available and it were forced without the f10 full screen option I think THAT would be not cared for by most players. I believe most of us would like to have it as an option... but few would use it full time.
Wenai
10-16-2019, 10:19 PM
Yeah seems funny to me that they are expending effort implementing the current iteration that most people don't care that much for when they could simply add texturing to the background of the UI elements to at least give them a similar look.
Again, the bank, trade, spellbook, char creation all are wonderful-- Now if they'd replicate that for the remainder of the elements, rather than focusing on "f10 classic" I think there are very few who would have any cause for complaint. The textured buttons on the sleek transparent background look silly. The textured windows mentioned above next to the untextured inventory etc; look like ass.
the titanium-era ui is preferable to this mish mash of "classic transparent" that is currently in use.
It is not a mish-mash. The Velious UI did not have assets for everything, and it used the marble assets for a lot of stuff (the stuff we have implemented; except we are missing a few windows like Merchant, Trade). This is not a stylistic or lazy approach. It is literally a re-creation using source screenshots in each case. And in some cases even using the Trilogy client itself to figure it out.
It is not a mish-mash. The Velious UI did not have assets for everything, and it used the marble assets for a lot of stuff (the stuff we have implemented; except we are missing a few windows like Merchant, Trade). This is not a stylistic or lazy approach. It is literally a re-creation using source screenshots in each case. And in some cases even using the Trilogy client itself to figure it out.
right, but since they don't wish to expend the energy required to bridge the gap, simply adopt a currently existing user interface for any number of sites that act as depositories for UI.
They are either truly recreating classic, or they aren't; and since they admittedly aren't, why enforce rules so they can pretend they are?
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:22 PM
all I'm saying is that there should be some consistency. In the current UI there are excellent examples of UI elements that bridge the gap between classic-stone and the current iteration.. but to disallow the usage of UI files that would allow their implementation? it's silly.
Again:
Are you thinking that by insulting them you'll convince the (again, 100% volunteers) who made the current Green UI to throw it out, and
... change a few UI windows to have a marble background?
So this giant pages-long rant isn't about Vert or Duxa: you're just insulting everyone involved with the entire project because you think that will convince them to make some windows, that didn't have marble in classic, have it on Green (even though everything about Green is about trying to be as classic as possible)?
Again:
... change a few UI windows to have a marble background?
So this giant pages-long rant isn't about Vert or Duxa: you're just insulting everyone involved with the entire project because you think that will convince them to make some windows, that didn't have marble in classic, have them on Green?
if people are getting offended by the fact that some people aren't 100% thrilled by the current iteration, that's a personal problem on them.
The simple fact is they literally cannot or will not recreate classic eq-- It has been stated.
so why implement rules which bar those who do not like the "alternative classic UI" so they can pretend they ARE fully recreating classic?
Ivory
10-16-2019, 10:25 PM
I think you're vastly underestimated the ease and viability of converting a full-screen UI mode designed for like 1024x768 max (or maybe 1280x1024?) into a 100% full-visible area UI with panes on it, which works even on giant 1920x1600 or larger resolutions.
Imma artist :) I could do it....just gotta know what pieces is needed.
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:26 PM
if people are getting offended by the fact that some people aren't 100% thrilled by the current iteration, that's a personal problem on them.
Do you even remember what you wrote?
That being said, the current UI is garbage. The farthest thing from Classic that I can possibly imagine. In fact it calls to mind my time during Luclin.
That was your very first post in this thread. You seriously think that if the volunteers ... who spent (collectively) hundreds of hours working on this new UI, doing their absolute best to make it as classic as possible, even though everything in Titanium was fighting them on it ... think that's rude, that they have a personal problem?
Really?
if people are getting offended by the fact that some people aren't 100% thrilled by the current iteration, that's a personal problem on them.
The simple fact is they literally cannot or will not recreate classic eq-- It has been stated.
so why implement rules which bar those who do not like the "alternative classic UI" so they can pretend they ARE fully recreating classic?
The point I'm making is that they are admittedly expending effort into a "next best thing" alternative since the primary classic UI allegedly "isn't capable" of being recreated-- So again, rules are being enforced to keep it classic when it's not even a truly classic recreation.
Do you even remember what you wrote?
That was your very first post in this thread. You seriously think that if the volunteers ... who spent (collectively) hundreds of hours working on this new UI, doing their absolute best to make it as classic as possible, even though everything in Titanium was fighting them on it ... think that's rude, that they have a personal problem?
Really?
if they take personal offense of my reasonably held opinion? yes. I'm clearly not the only one who takes issue with this UI since it's been mentioned more than once in this thread that this topic comes up rather often and I've seen a couple others mention it in the discord channel since I joined just a couple hours ago.
ldgo86
10-16-2019, 10:29 PM
if people are getting offended by the fact that some people aren't 100% thrilled by the current iteration, that's a personal problem on them.
The simple fact is they literally cannot or will not recreate classic eq-- It has been stated.
so why implement rules which bar those who do not like the "alternative classic UI" so they can pretend they ARE fully recreating classic?
They are recreating something classic sorry it’s not exactly what you want /facepalm
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:30 PM
Imma artist :) I could do it....just gotta know what pieces is needed.
The UI team will have the most knowledge on the matter, so I'd recommend getting in touch with them.
But again, I strongly suspect you'll see the problem when you actually start trying to make things look good at 800x600 AND more than twice that resolution. The stone UI really wasn't designed for it.
aaezil
10-16-2019, 10:30 PM
Imagine feeling as entitled as OP
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:31 PM
if they take personal offense of my reasonably held opinion? yes. I'm clearly not the only one who takes issue with this UI since it's been mentioned more than once in this thread that this topic comes up rather often and I've seen a couple others mention it in the discord channel since I joined just a couple hours ago.
As the saying goes, "it had nothing to do with what you said, and everything to do with how you said it".
I wish I could go to your work place, crap on your desk, and then tell you that it's your personal problem ... not because I think it would drive the point home to you (you've made it clear you'll bury your head in the sand and take no responsibility for anything you do no matter what) ... but just for the sort-of-poetic justice of it.
You're an asshole dude.
deezy
10-16-2019, 10:32 PM
Imagine feeling as entitled as OP
As the saying goes, "it had nothing to do with what you said, and everything to do with how you said it".
I wish I could go to your work place, crap on your desk, and then tell you that it's your personal problem.
You're an asshole dude.
And it's your absolute right to hold that opinion. I am not going to start lashing out because you believe so.
See the difference?
deezy
10-16-2019, 10:34 PM
nobody is stopping you from submitting your own ui changes. i would welcome them.
nobody is stopping you from submitting your own ui changes. i would welcome them.
I can link you to several EQ UI Depositories that have ui aesthetics that would be acceptable alternatives. I take it you live in North Korea and don't have access to Google?
loramin
10-16-2019, 10:35 PM
And it's your absolute right to hold that opinion. I am not going to start lashing out because you believe so.
See the difference?
You're correct ... in the sense that one can't "start lashing out" when one has been doing it for six pages (in just this thread alone).
But I'm done: keep yelling at me if you want, but I'm going to go eat dinner.
Vexenu
10-16-2019, 10:39 PM
I DEMAND the staff return all of the OP's monthly donations and write him a letter of apology. The nerve of these people for not creating a UI exactly to his liking!
I DEMAND the staff return all of the OP's monthly donations and write him a letter of apology. The nerve of these people for not creating a UI exactly to his liking!
I don't expect them to create it to tailor my interests. Because other people already have. There are several websites that literally act as depositories for fully fleshed out UI alternatives. But we're not allowed to use them because "it's not classic"-- when in reality they are admittedly incapable of fully recreating the classic experience.
My biggest issue is the cherry picking of what "keeping it classic" means. It's a load of shit.
Don't worry though, within weeks of launch someone will find a way to dupe the server into recognizing altered UI files, and fix the issue the same way they "fixed" the "ban" of luclin models on blue :)
deezy
10-16-2019, 10:43 PM
I take it you live in North Korea and don't have access to Google?
yes, i live in north korea and am unable to access google. you're quite helpful.
aaezil
10-16-2019, 10:44 PM
Yes he doesnt need petty server devs he will crack the code!
You’ll pay
You’ll all pay!
Yes he doesnt need petty server devs he will crack the code!
You’ll pay
You’ll all pay!
Never said I would, I am admittedly not that technically savvy. But in the same way that folks corrected the ban on luclin models on blue, I'm sure some highly competent individual will find a way to implement ui custom ui models.
kylok
10-16-2019, 10:48 PM
Never said I would, I am admittedly not that technically savvy. But in the same way that folks corrected the ban on luclin models on blue, I'm sure some highly competent individual will find a way to implement ui custom ui models.
Yikes. Bye bye Luclin Models. Don't even need to patch.
nope, re-banned
deezy
10-16-2019, 10:53 PM
My biggest issue is the cherry picking of what "keeping it classic" means. It's a load of shit.
you make it sound personal or that i have any sort of power on this server. i do not. i'm simply a player who is doing my best to recreate the classic ui to the best of my ability. i've literally been studying old screenshots to try to replicate those. i'd estimate we're around 90+% successful right now.
why don't you contribute something? you sound like you want the best ui possible. so do i.
you make it sound personal or that i have any sort of power on this server. i do not. i'm simply a player who is doing my best to recreate the classic ui to the best of my ability. i've literally been studying old screenshots to try to replicate those. i'd estimate we're around 90+% successful right now.
why don't you contribute something? you sound like you want the best ui possible. so do i.
Again: this falls on yhour shoulders. My criticism of the rules is not a criticism of you.
deezy
10-16-2019, 10:56 PM
Again: this falls on yhour shoulders. My criticism of the rules is not a criticism of you.
why shouldn't it fall on your shoulders? you can contribute too.
why shouldn't it fall on your shoulders? you can contribute too.
I'm not talking about the obligation to contribute; I'm talking about you taking offense by my criticism of the currently in place ruling that third party UI elements are disallowed. If you aren't in charge of that decision, yet you are personally offended when I call BS on the ruling? Well, that's a "you" problem
deezy
10-16-2019, 11:05 PM
I'm not talking about the obligation to contribute; I'm talking about you taking offense by my criticism of the currently in place ruling that third party UI elements are disallowed. If you aren't in charge of that decision, yet you are personally offended when I call BS on the ruling? Well, that's a "you" problem
i'm not easily offended and you have not offended me. i'm asking you to help.
i'm not easily offended and you have not offended me. i'm asking you to help.
Again-- There are many fully fleshed out third party UI options that would help to implement what it is I'd like to see in particular.
And according to several people, and a wiki post-- the truly classic marbled stone UI is actually NOT possible.
And it seems as though the "classic f10" is well on it's way to full implementation-- and that's not what I'm interested in, in the slightest--
given that what I'm after isn't even close to what is being pursued , even if I were capable of helping in that respect, what good would come of it?
I should spend my time helping finish a UI that I have no desire to see implemented?
Or should I spend my time creating elements for a "less classic, but more suited to my personal tastes" ui that will not be implemented per mandates by the people running things?
deezy
10-16-2019, 11:16 PM
Again-- There are many fully fleshed out third party UI options that would help to implement what it is I'd like to see in particular.
And according to several people, and a wiki post-- the truly classic marbled stone UI is actually NOT possible.
And it seems as though the "classic f10" is well on it's way to full implementation-- and that's not what I'm interested in, in the slightest--
given that what I'm after isn't even close to what is being pursued , even if I were capable of helping in that respect, what good would come of it?
I should spend my time helping finish a UI that I have no desire to see implemented?
Or should I spend my time creating elements for a "less classic, but more suited to my personal tastes" ui that will not be implemented per mandates by the people running things?
i'll take all that as a no. your opinion has been noted. thanks for contributing.
i'll take all that as a no. your opinion has been noted. thanks for contributing.
You failed to actully address what I said.
Why would I contribute when what I want is off the table? Literally against the rules with measures taken to prevent it's implementation.
Ivory
10-16-2019, 11:20 PM
So....why not use....this? https://www.eqinterface.com/downloads/fileinfo.php?id=4726
Maybe tweak it a little bit ...but....looks nice.
https://imgur.com/FfiezDi.png
So....why not use....this? https://www.eqinterface.com/downloads/fileinfo.php?id=4726
Maybe tweak it a little bit ...but....looks nice.
https://imgur.com/FfiezDi.png
you're wasting your time. I've brought up several times that what I'm talking about, what I would love to see, would require less effort on behalf of the devs than the current implementation has-- because these UI files already exist and have been fully fleshed out for modern resolution/client etc.
dekova
10-16-2019, 11:25 PM
you're wasting your time. I've brought up several times that what I'm talking about, what I would love to see, would require less effort on behalf of the devs than the current implementation has-- because these UI files already exist and have been fully fleshed out for modern resolution/client etc.
How would you implement something like this that has fixed sized assets and requires the use of a specifically sized viewport? It's a UI that's built for one specific resolution, something we don't have the luxury of doing.
Ivory
10-16-2019, 11:28 PM
you're wasting your time. I've brought up several times that what I'm talking about, what I would love to see, would require less effort on behalf of the devs than the current implementation has-- because these UI files already exist and have been fully fleshed out for modern resolution/client etc.
I wouldn't take the exact UI....but it seems like a REALLY good starting point. Like trim down the sides a bit....and have bags be pop ups....
But I'm not too sure where the problem is. It seems like the art / UI elements are already ready to be used.
How would you implement something like this that has fixed sized assets and requires the use of a specifically sized viewport?
How many times must I say it? I'm not asking that they fully implement the 100% classic UI. I've acknowledged that I understand it can't be done, be it due to technical or simply manpower limitations.
What I'm saying is that by barring us from using third party UI's, they're squashing the ability to find something that bridges the gap between what we have now and what we wish we could have.
There are third party UI's; as posted by ivory just above, that add the granite-background/sandstone buttons/scroll effects to the current, free-floating ui elements. Kind of like how the bank/merchant/trade/book appears to fit the truly classic motif, int he current iteration of their "f10 classic" ui.
But we aren't allowed to use those third party alternatives. Because the devs in their wisdom have decided that even though we can't have a truly classic experience, they need to implement rules to prevent people from finding a happy medium. That it's "not classic" even though the true classic experience isn't possible.
I wouldn't take the exact UI....but it seems like a REALLY good starting point. Like trim down the sides a bit....and have bags be pop ups....
But I'm not too sure where the problem is. It seems like the art / UI elements are already ready to be used.
I would be psyched just to see the current free-floating UI elements with the granite background textures etc. And i'm almost certain that a UI that accomplishes this is floating round out there. But even though the classic UI isn't being pursued, finding a happy medium via third party alternatives is too not classic to be permissible.
aaezil
10-16-2019, 11:31 PM
A dev literally explained why not on page 3
/thread
Ivory
10-16-2019, 11:32 PM
How would you implement something like this that has fixed sized assets and requires the use of a specifically sized viewport? It's a UI that's built for one specific resolution, something we don't have the luxury of doing.
The assets are fixed size, but you can scale it.
Also chop it up and throw it into some windows as backgrounds as a "modern middle ground" (to account for various resolution).
Like, it seems really the problem is just some background graphics and the layout of the inventory and that type of thing.
Though I don't really understand why they switched in the first place. The UI they have been using for the last 10 years around here was pretty decent ....it wasn't super perfect ....but it was a good middle ground of "everquest feeling".
Far more than that cold cold inventory screen now.
Mblake81
10-16-2019, 11:35 PM
That it's "not classic" even though the true classic experience isn't possible.
Nope. Here we 30 somethings are sitting around playing a 20 year old game and arguing over if a spot of rust should be on the tailpipe of this restoration. IMO PC gaming didn't go to brave new frontiers, instead and perhaps due to the OS company jumping ship, we have been reduced in a modern sense to being an upgraded console using console games software in some hack ideal of trying to please everyone.
I should be playing a 2019 CRPG, maybe an MMO or something. Sorry I have disposable income but not for microtransactions and foolishness.
(Old heads called games like EQ foolish because it was opening the door for paying for a game outside of the initial purchase at the store. They were right.)
Nope. Here we 30 somethings are sitting around playing a 20 year old game and arguing over if a spot of rust should be on the tailpipe of this restoration. IMO PC gaming didn't go to brave new frontiers, instead and perhaps due to the OS company jumping ship, we have been reduced in a modern sense to being an upgraded console using console games software in some hack ideal of trying to please everyone.
I should be playing a 2019 CRPG, maybe an MMO or something. Sorry I have disposable income but not for microtransactions and foolishness.
(Old heads called games like EQ foolish because it was opening the door for paying for a game outside of the initial purchase at the store. They were right.)
I kinda disagree. MMO's were a bit of an exception to the rule. because of the static nature of your character, and the constantly online status. Servers are expensive, and as populations grow, more and better servers are required to keep up with demand. Not to mention staff for customer service etc, development staff for regular updates etc.
I've played a lot of MMO's since EQ; most recently ESO-- And I find the experience is leagues better when you have a mandatory sub, because that puts less focus on micro transactions and gives devs incentive to create new content solely obtainable through in-game efforts. ESO for example, has no mandatory sub these days, and most of the content updates are centered around cash shop items. Since I pay the sub for ESO anyway, I'd prefer the items be obtainable via gameplay and the subscription model be mandatory.
Mblake81
10-16-2019, 11:48 PM
I kinda disagree. MMO's were a bit of an exception to the rule. because of the static nature of your character, and the constantly online status. Servers are expensive, and as populations grow, more and better servers are required to keep up with demand. Not to mention staff for customer service etc, development staff for regular updates etc.
That is how I also understand computer mmorpgs like EQ, they were their own thing. The games market sees that differently though. Once you open a gate any fool with their ideas can step through.
Wenai
10-17-2019, 05:05 AM
So....why not use....this? https://www.eqinterface.com/downloads/fileinfo.php?id=4726
Maybe tweak it a little bit ...but....looks nice.
https://imgur.com/FfiezDi.png
you're wasting your time. I've brought up several times that what I'm talking about, what I would love to see, would require less effort on behalf of the devs than the current implementation has-- because these UI files already exist and have been fully fleshed out for modern resolution/client etc.
A dev literally explained why not on page 3
/thread
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2987805&postcount=26
Wenai
10-17-2019, 05:41 AM
Everyone is also forgetting that we need to support a large variety of resolutions. EQ UI elements are not made to be scalable. So this means the people needing to use 1280x720 and people needing to use 4K all need to use UI components of the same size. If we make the components extremely large for the 4K crowd, the UI becomes unusable for the 1280x720 crowd.
Everyone seems to think that using one opaque UI with pieces that are supposed to placed together is going to work for every single UI. At the end of day we would probably need to size it for 1280x720 so it useable by people of that resolution and then everyone of a larger resolution would just have a shitty looking stone UI that they can’t size properly.
I mean the release notes of that link specifically state it ONLY works with one resolution. So can you imagine people lashing out about needing to size down that small for the stone UI to work? It would be worse than what we have now because people “don’t like the velious UI”. I haven’t seen anyone with a valid argument that what we have worked on is not accurate. Everything being complained about is preference. I consider that a win in my books.
Sinistria
10-17-2019, 05:54 AM
I liked the way for a monthly fee more.
Today you play through a game and get a beautiful item in the shop for microtransactions, wich is OK for some games.
I realy like Path of Exile for example.
But in a game with a monthly fee you knew that everything in the game (specially when it was a bit harder, like EQ was) was earned by players with patience and teamwork.
It was worth something. Not just pay money. It was about reputation:
Did you see XY? Wow, he made it.
He finaly got XYZ. That looks so cool.
I wish i could anesthetize myself for the next week... i can't wait.
This in mind: bronze armor will be so uber :D
zodium
10-17-2019, 05:59 AM
OK. I keep seeing a lot of conversation about the Stone UI. The enforcement of the Velious UI was announced a while back. We just simply started a project only a few weeks ago attempting to improve on the UI they had chosen to use (it has been distributed in patch files for quite a while).
Now what are some of the issues with the Stone UI? See the linked image.
https://i.imgur.com/lWB5U9F.png
Now. Can these issues be overcome? Yep absolutely!
EverQuest supports custom viewports, so realistically you could define a 4:3 view port, and place your stone elements around the view port and never lose any visibility. That is 100% possible. However... and this is a huge however.
The majority of the community can't even figure out how to set solid backgrounds on their Velious UI elements. So the idea of forcing an obstructive opaque UI on people, of which I would guess 95% wouldn't be able to figure out, or even attempt to get a proper ViewPort working sounds like a terrible idea to me.
At the end of the day there was a "Velious-style" UI available at launch in the F10 Full Screen. It lacked a LOT of functionality compared to the Stone UI. The Velious UI simply added all of that functionality to the F10 Full Screen UI. So the Velious UI is honestly the best, least-hassle option available for people to use. We were able to find lots of resources showing tons of marble windows were present in the Velious UI and we have implemented most of them!
I also want to stress that I have NO control over which UI is forced for Green. I simply helped to improve what was being forced. :)
blessed post
Coridan
10-17-2019, 06:19 AM
Here's the thing...most people didn't play f10 in the "totally classic semi transparent black boxes of boring".
Yea, having a "classic feeling recreation" isn't 100% classic...BUT it is a LOT closer to the CLASSIC FEELING than these black boxes.
THIS is classic UI..... what people remember of EQ....not a cold black box found in some obscure 2ndary mode.....but classic late 90's roleplaying design that tried to draw the player in with a more comforting design.
Even if the "true classic UI" isn't possible....AT LEAST give something SOMEWHAT along those lines. Capture the feeling...not just shrug and go "well, not possible, so let's go for this 2ndary mode that looks ugly"
It's absolutely killing the feel of a classic EQ experience.
https://imgur.com/40CC2j6.jpg
LOL what? I was playing since June 99, I figured out F10 ui in about 2 days everyone used F10, people who didn't got made fun of. Running the stone ui on a 14" monitor in 640x480 you basically saw nothing lol. Hitting F10 was amazing.
soronil
10-17-2019, 07:30 AM
I haven’t seen anyone with a valid argument that what we have worked on is not accurate. Everything being complained about is preference. I consider that a win in my books.
Seriously?? You sound out of touch or that you aren't listening to valid criticism.
I agree there are a lot of people just bitching because they don't like it, but a large part of it, and a legitimate problem, is that it's simply hard to read on many set ups.
You guys tried to use an interface designed for resolutions that were used at a much larger scale (1024x768 on 16" is not the same scale as 1920x1080 on a 20"). It didn't work very well for some people.
I made a bigger post here:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2988214&postcount=203
But basically you guys really need to consider upscaling the UI, OR releasing multiple versions with different scales.
Deathrydar
10-17-2019, 07:48 AM
Oh look. Another whiney "I can't deal with the UI" thread. And the OP will spend 25 pages trying to explain his ridiculous stance on something that no one is going to change anyway because the devs here don't cater to whiners.
Bye!
soronil
10-17-2019, 07:55 AM
Oh look. Another whiney "I can't deal with the UI" thread. And the OP will spend 25 pages trying to explain his ridiculous stance on something that no one is going to change anyway because the devs here don't cater to whiners.
Bye!
Super useful contribution, man.
Not OP but look at the comparison between the two images in this post:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2988214&postcount=203
And tell me that the green UI is at a perfect scale at all resolutions and couldn't possibly be hard to read on certain set ups to some people.
If you say so, then you're not qualified to contribute to this discussion anyway, so bye indeed.
Mblake81
10-17-2019, 08:01 AM
LOL what? I was playing since June 99, I figured out F10 ui in about 2 days everyone used F10, people who didn't got made fun of. Running the stone ui on a 14" monitor in 640x480 you basically saw nothing lol. Hitting F10 was amazing.
I am not defending the guy you are responding to but just responding to your post. I used the stone UI up until the start of Kunark. So did the people I played with, no one made fun of anyone using the UI that I recall. IIRC my computer puchased in 2000 using the Gforce 256 would lag a bit when toggled to full screen.
You saw everything in the periscope that you seen toggled to full screen. It was the same image but larger. IIRC that is why periscope view existed in the first place. Despite it being the same image it wasn't so intensive on your computer, the stone UI didn't move around on screen.
soronil
10-17-2019, 08:09 AM
You saw everything in the periscope that you seen toggled to full screen. It was the same image but larger. IIRC that is why periscope view existed in the first place. Despite it being the same image it wasn't so intensive on your computer, the stone UI didn't move around on screen.
Exactly. traditional graphics pipeline first calculates the world in "world space" and then translates it to "screen space" where many operations are done by pixel. Less pixels, less calculation. The stone UI would be over 2x faster than full screen UI, which was a big deal for in-era hardware.
Danth
10-17-2019, 08:09 AM
Seriously?? You sound out of touch or that you aren't listening to valid criticism.
I agree there are a lot of people just bitching because they don't like it, but a large part of it, and a legitimate problem, is that it's simply hard to read on many set ups.
You guys tried to use an interface designed for resolutions that were used at a much larger scale (1024x768 on 16" is not the same scale as 1920x1080 on a 20"). It didn't work very well for some people.
I made a bigger post here:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2988214&postcount=203
But basically you guys really need to consider upscaling the UI, OR releasing multiple versions with different scales.
Actually, all "you guys" did was use an interface that has been packaged with P1999's download for at least a couple years, and which would have been forced on "green" anyway, and make it look more accurate for what it was supposed to represent. That's it. Hence what Wenai meant by calling it a win from his standpoint: You being unhappy with the window scaling or whatnot is not related to any work they did, or would have done. You're actually unhappy with Nilbog and Rogean for requiring the use of the "Velious UI." That's appropriate enough for a "green UI" thread, but understand that different people involved had different roles. Wenai/Deezy/Jibartik essentially set out, originally, to replace grey buttons with white buttons. They're not the folks to be unhappy with if you dislike the UI more generally because if they had done nothing at all you'd still be unhappy, only you'd be unhappy with the older version of that UI. I'm not calling your complaints invalid, only pointing you towards the correct people.
Danth
soronil
10-17-2019, 08:15 AM
They're not the folks to be unhappy with if you dislike the UI more generally because if they had done nothing at all you'd still be unhappy, only you'd be unhappy with the older version of that UI. I'm not calling your complaints invalid, only pointing you towards the correct people.
Danth
That is a valid point. I actually like the recent ui changes and appreciate them, and I personally am willing to do janky things like force myself to play in fullscreen at weird resolutions to play the game. But people have valid complaints about "The UI" in that the scale is not classic, and hard to read/use on many set ups.
Yes most people are confused / directing at wrong people / making stupid arguments, but that does not mean that there is not a valid issue with "The UI" that could probably be addressed (and maybe should be addressed, depending on how difficult, before doing any other UI work)
Wenai
10-17-2019, 08:16 AM
Super useful contribution, man.
Not OP but look at the comparison between the two images in this post:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2988214&postcount=203
And tell me that the green UI is at a perfect scale at all resolutions and couldn't possibly be hard to read on certain set ups to some people.
If you say so, then you're not qualified to contribute to this discussion anyway, so bye indeed.
I am at work currently. But when I get home I will dig up some velious screenshots. The UI components were different sizes based on the resolution of the monitor. EXACTLY like how it is behaving here.
At the end of the day, there is a very wide array of resolutions people will be using on P1999.
Cheap Laptop with integrated graphics? Probably 720p.
Desktop with standard monitor? Probably 1080p.
Some will have 4K, some will have ultra wides. At the end of the day the only logical thing to do is support the lowest resolution that is likely to be used. Because sizing a UI for 4K and expecting people on 720p to deal with it is ridiculous. People with larger monitors have the ability to play windowed mode, or play at a lower resolution. People with smaller resolutions don’t have any option to scale up.
Once again. This UI was pre-packaged and planned to be used anyway. All we did was replace some components with the proper Velious UI components and clean up some bugs.
Mblake81
10-17-2019, 08:29 AM
I am at work currently. But when I get home I will dig up some velious screenshots. The UI components were different sizes based on the resolution of the monitor. EXACTLY like how it is behaving here.
At the end of the day, there is a very wide array of resolutions people will be using on P1999.
Cheap Laptop with integrated graphics? Probably 720p.
Desktop with standard monitor? Probably 1080p.
Some will have 4K, some will have ultra wides. At the end of the day the only logical thing to do is support the lowest resolution that is likely to be used. Because sizing a UI for 4K and expecting people on 720p to deal with it is ridiculous. People with larger monitors have the ability to play windowed mode, or play at a lower resolution. People with smaller resolutions don’t have any option to scale up.
Once again. This UI was pre-packaged and planned to be used anyway. All we did was replace some components with the proper Velious UI components and clean up some bugs.
I gotcha.
Everquest in 2001 (http://www.tolwyn.com/everquest-2001/)
https://i.imgur.com/cE0DjUL.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/CHigz4Y.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/CxW8YCD.jpg
Who is Frina Hateblade and Hurog Darkstar?
https://i.imgur.com/8voTzIh.jpg
Some of those boat pics have me nostalgia tripping hard.
https://i.imgur.com/EwkJrYA.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/pNz1bLw.jpg
soronil
10-17-2019, 08:53 AM
At the end of the day the only logical thing to do is support the lowest resolution that is likely to be used. Because sizing a UI for 4K and expecting people on 720p to deal with it is ridiculous. People with larger monitors have the ability to play windowed mode, or play at a lower resolution. People with smaller resolutions don’t have any option to scale up.
\
Speaking of logic...
The problem is this UI was designed for the lowest resolution that was likely to be used 20 years ago. It really needs to be scaled up to support the lowest resolution that would be used today, which will give the 80% of people at a higher resolution than that a UI which is much more usable.
Once again. This UI was pre-packaged and planned to be used anyway. All we did was replace some components with the proper Velious UI components and clean up some bugs.
I completely understand that the scale of the UI is outside the scope of what you were trying to accomplish. And i am not directing my comments at you directly. I am just making statements to describe the problem and possible solutions.
The fact is that project 1999 will suffer because of the forced UI that will feel very "not classic" for most people trying to play at their native resolution due to the fact that it does not scale. If anyone wants to try to fix that, that would be much appreciated by many people
loramin
10-17-2019, 11:09 AM
The fact is that project 1999 will suffer because of the forced UI that will feel very "not classic" for most people trying to play at their native resolution due to the fact that it does not scale.
Can we just talk about this bit? I think you and many others are entirely missing ...
https://i.imgur.com/AD6JpcG.png
Green is the realization of ten years of effort by Rogean and Nilbog. Nilbog himself famously said (and I'm paraphrasing, but you can find the exact quote if you look) "I don't care if I drive away every last player, I'm going to make Project 1999 as classic as possible". The fact that we can even play at resolutions higher than 1280x1024 is them "compromising their vision" a little (I half believe that if Titanium made it easy, they'd disallow those resolutions too ;))
For 10 years that's been the goal! Ten years of them making decisions people hate, decisions people spend 25 pages complaining about, decisions that affected the game even more than the choice of UI. And for ten years people have been talking about how such changes will be the death of the project.
Like everyone in this thread keeps repeating, these UI choices aren't theirs: they're R&N's. R&N have been doing what they're doing for a decade, and despite (quite literally) hundreds (if not thousands) of threads like this one, Project 1999 has never "suffered" from their leadership (which isn't to say they always make the right decisions: they're human, so of course they make mistakes too ... but in aggregate they've always "steered the ship" to success).
With Green's release the server will have a higher population than ever before, and that will be because of, not in spite of, Rogean and Nilbog, and the decisions they've made for the past ten years.
But again, even if those decisions left only 100 nerds playing on a "classic as possible" server? I feel like Nilbog (and likely Rogean too) would be perfectly ok with that, and wouldn't consider the project a failure if it happened. Because their goal wasn't to get as many players as possible, it was to make a server that's as classic as possible.
Imagine feeling as entitled as OP
Guaranteed the OP is a millennial Bernie supporter.
Baler
10-17-2019, 07:02 PM
I am excited for the forced UI on green. :)
whitebandit
10-17-2019, 07:04 PM
Guaranteed the OP is a millennial Bernie supporter.
guys.... lets not discriminate. I am a Bernie supporter and i too think OP is a whiner, GreenUI is life.
dussle27
10-17-2019, 07:15 PM
Nilbog himself famously said (and I'm paraphrasing, but you can find the exact quote if you look) "I don't care if I drive away every last player, I'm going to make Project 1999 as classic as possible".
I believe the correct quote was, "I'm going to make P99 as classic as possible and I don't care how many productive members of society I turn into drooling welfare leeches by doing so."
Some might say it's a been harsh, but you have to admire a man with conviction. He should consider a career in big pharma.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.