Moderator: Cartographers
Ditocoaf wrote:I have to say... that is some of the most subtle animation I have seen in a long time. Looking at the version at the top of page 8, I had to practically glue my eyeballs to my laptop to figure out what was going on there. Perhaps there's a slightly more contrasting way you can highlight those dots? Actually, now that I think about it, the problem would probably be solved if they were lit for a longer period of time; long enough for me to figure out exactly which ones are lit and which aren't.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:Here you go cairns hope your happy now
gimil wrote:
My idea was that if you where to read the legends you would see it while scanning over that area. Your not looking for the animation but you see it it the first time you read it. This means you know its their and can look back to it if you need to, without it annoying you while playing.
any else agree with me?
cairnswk wrote:gimil wrote:
My idea was that if you where to read the legends you would see it while scanning over that area. Your not looking for the animation but you see it it the first time you read it. This means you know its their and can look back to it if you need to, without it annoying you while playing.
any else agree with me?
not only that it emphasises that there is somehting special tht players need to take notice of.
I agree with you.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:I have to say... that is some of the most subtle animation I have seen in a long time. Looking at the version at the top of page 8, I had to practically glue my eyeballs to my laptop to figure out what was going on there. Perhaps there's a slightly more contrasting way you can highlight those dots? Actually, now that I think about it, the problem would probably be solved if they were lit for a longer period of time; long enough for me to figure out exactly which ones are lit and which aren't.
My idea was that if you where to read the legends you would see it while scanning over that area. Your not looking for the animation but you see it it the first time you read it. This means you know its their and can look back to it if you need to, without it annoying you while playing.
any else agree with me?
Ditocoaf wrote:gimil wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:I have to say... that is some of the most subtle animation I have seen in a long time. Looking at the version at the top of page 8, I had to practically glue my eyeballs to my laptop to figure out what was going on there. Perhaps there's a slightly more contrasting way you can highlight those dots? Actually, now that I think about it, the problem would probably be solved if they were lit for a longer period of time; long enough for me to figure out exactly which ones are lit and which aren't.
My idea was that if you where to read the legends you would see it while scanning over that area. Your not looking for the animation but you see it it the first time you read it. This means you know its their and can look back to it if you need to, without it annoying you while playing.
any else agree with me?
Perhaps you could draw it out so that they glow more slowly then? (so that they stay lit longer, and fade in and out more slowly) It would even be less distracting, but easier to see which dots are lit.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:yeti_c wrote:It's a shame the new wording knocks the layout off what was previously spot on.
C.
hoo hum.
cicero wrote:gimil wrote:yeti_c wrote:It's a shame the new wording knocks the layout off what was previously spot on.
C.
hoo hum.
It seems to me that this is the only issue remaining ...
Perhaps this could be addressed by reconsidering which/how many of the 'rule 1' examples to include.
At the moment we, somewhat arbitrarily, include one or more example of 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 & 20.
We already exclude 12, 14 & 16.
If we were to exclude one further row of examples the layout could be restored to its former glory.
Perhaps exclude the 20?
Or combine the 10 and the 20 on one line?
cicero wrote:Seems to me it's still a little cramped, but that's fine as long as everyone else is happy.
Does that mean we're just waiting for stamps now?
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:Oaktowns away for the weekend (again) for a job interview. Wish him luck everyone
oaktown wrote:Hmm, and I see you are calling a Conquer 4 a "Row" - maybe sets is better? Anyway, that's ticky-tack stuff...
cairnswk wrote:
Gimil, could you just indulge me with a slight adjustment as suggested in the above graphic and space that bonus area out a fraction just so the whole thing doesn't look quite so squashed...each section squashed on top of each other.
Then I can recommend stamping. Thanks.
yeti_c wrote:.....
You're a hard man to please Cairns... you were asking for those to be aligned with the other bits earlier on in the thread!!?!
C.
cairnswk wrote:yeti_c wrote:.....
You're a hard man to please Cairns... you were asking for those to be aligned with the other bits earlier on in the thread!!?!
C.
Yes and i feel this hasn't quite accomplished it and can be bettered. It's only a small movement change and would make it look so much better.
And beside, Gimil does it to me.....Revenge is sweat Hahahaha! JK.
yeti_c wrote:cairnswk wrote:yeti_c wrote:.....
You're a hard man to please Cairns... you were asking for those to be aligned with the other bits earlier on in the thread!!?!
C.
Yes and i feel this hasn't quite accomplished it and can be bettered. It's only a small movement change and would make it look so much better.
And beside, Gimil does it to me.....Revenge is sweat Hahahaha! JK.
Fair doos!!
C.
(PS I'd rather be not having sweat tasting revenge... I prefer sweet versions!)
yeti_c wrote:Fair doos!!
C.
(PS I'd rather be not having sweat tasting revenge... I prefer sweet versions!)
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Users browsing this forum: No registered users