Can we talk about Green UI?

[Ivory]

Originally Posted by dekova [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Xer0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.)

[Xer0]

Originally Posted by Mblake81 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Xer0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Ivory [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So....why not use....this? https://www.eqinterface.com/download...fo.php?id=4726

Maybe tweak it a little bit ...but....looks nice.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by Xer0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by aaezil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A dev literally explained why not on page 3

/thread

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...5&postcount=26

[Wenai]

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]

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 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[zodium]

Originally Posted by Wenai [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

blessed post

[Coridan]

Originally Posted by Ivory [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.


[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Wenai [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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/s...&postcount=203
But basically you guys really need to consider upscaling the UI, OR releasing multiple versions with different scales.