Simplify the menus

[MeusH]

I think the menus are too complex, espessialy for newbie players.
I know tycoon nerds have no problem with it, but I think the bad thing in the menu is
that there is a button showing window with a button showing window... y'know

Also deleting the "scenario selecting" option should be disabled since OTTD has no scenarios

[SHADOW-XIII]

I agree:
- too complex for newcomers
- too messed ... now everyone can add everything and it's going to be mess ... a button that opens a windows, in the window a button that opens new one ... ... terrible ... use and expand existing menu
- settings, better default settings so newcomers will don't have to change much (or anything) to get nice playing with nearly all options turned on ...

[MeusH]

How about hind when right-clicking?

Like selectcargo: "Cargo won't pop up on the station until vehicle comes for it" or something kinda...

[dominik81]

If you have specific ideas about how to improve the navigation, than please share them with us. We'd be happy to simplify things. As for the "configure patches" menu: This one will be cleaned up sometime.

Also deleting the "scenario selecting" option should be disabled since OTTD has no scenarios

We're still hoping that you guys will produce some nice maps that we can include with OpenTTD as scenarios...

[MeusH]

Yeah, I've started to make a scenario, but since it shows on the list for all 4 regions (temperate, desert, arctic, toyland) I've stopped to do them.

[Hadez]

Yeah, I've started to make a scenario, but since it shows on the list for all 4 regions (temperate, desert, arctic, toyland) I've stopped to do them.

Probably just one "if" block for the devs. But the scenario has its climate saved in it, so you won´t get a temperate-origin scenario with toyland´s look

[MeusH]

That's right, but anyway, it is big mess with current scenario list

[Hadez]

If you think so... IMHO Trasport Tycoon (and OTTD indeed) has a very logical UI compared with other games. Write here what would you change, I have no clue what is bothering you.

[Moriarty]

Or a better idea, do a mock up, so we can see what you believe it could be changed to.

[Wolf01]

i'm agree to simplify menus, maybe in Loco style where all items are grouped in the area under buttons, you click on one button then the "container" change the items, or else like sim city4 style, where when you click on one button the tree expands and is not movable, but is tiny and don't is a problem

[DaleStan]

NOOOOO!!!!
Maybe I just haven't played Loco enough, but I hate its menu system.

As I can't really explain what's logically wrong with it, it's probably just that I haven't played it enough, but there's something about its menus that I Just Don't Like.

[Wolf01]

NOOOOO!!!!
Maybe I just haven't played Loco enough, but I hate its menu system.

As I can't really explain what's logically wrong with it, it's probably just that I haven't played it enough, but there's something about its menus that I Just Don't Like.

ok, vote for SC4 style, here a textual preview:

Code: Select all

MENU (click here to hide all the tree)
  |
  |
TRAINS-----|--|-build railway		(toggle, when selected one type also all tree is switched for that type, you can select one type per time)
  |        |  |-build monorail
  |        |  |-build maglev
  |        |  |-other types of track....
  |        |  .
  |        |
  |        |--|-build depots
  |        |  |-build stations
  |        |  |-build checkpoints
  |        |  .
  |        |
  |        |--|-build signals
  |        .  |-build tunnels
  |        .  |-build bridges
  |        .  .
  |
ROAD V.
  |
SHIPS
  |
AIRCRAFTS
  |
LANDSCAPING

[MeusH]

I meant main menu, because current in-game HUD is good.

[Hadez]

And what´s wrong with the main menu then?
Suggest something at least.

[Archonix]

I'm dragging up stuff from memory here. In our design classes at university we were told that there should be no more than 3 (I think) clicks to get to all the major parts of a user interface. So, say you want to get to a save game loader screen, it should be no more than three clicks away from the main interface. In fact for something that important it should be directly accessible from teh front of the game. That's 3 clicks for each main "place", like options, scenario loading, altering switches etc. Basically you want to avoid really deep menu trees wherever possible. Perhaps the worst that could be said for the TTD UI is that it's cluttered in to a relatively small area. Other than that the UI is actually a very well made one. Simple, clean and fairly logically laid out. I think MeusH simply wants something more... eyecandyish.

[Dundee]

The terrain types displayed and the 'Difficulty (...)' button are applicable only to the 'Start a game'/'Create scenario' buttons. By placing 'Difficulty (...)' on the main screen, next to 'Game Options' on the current screen, there's an implication that the difficulty is a global setting.

edit: Also, at the current time the Multiplayer button acts, (in 0.3.4), as a command button (you click it, and something happens immediately), whilst the Single player button acts as a checkbox (it stays depressed when clicked, and means the game is in single player mode).

The way I see it, there are only a couple of actions:

* Start a game - goes to a screen showing difficulty and terrain settings for game to follow, multiplayer/single player etc.
* Load a game - goes to a load dialog
* Start a scenario - goes to a pretty scenario list
* Create a scenario - goes to a screen similar to start a game
* Options - gamewide options
* Exit - leaves the game

[MeusH]

I agree with Dundee.
And I think game options\difficulity settings\configure patches is too much!

[Celestar]

I agree on that one and it will be changed one day in the future, once the billions of patch settings have been cleaned up.

Celestar

[BJH]

Yes, searching for a certain option at three possible places is not much fun...

Here is my idea:
The "Configure-Patches"-window could be use as a basis for a new Options-window. Merging it with the DifficultyLevel-window should't be a a big problem, since there is for most of the settings in the difficuly-window a fitting category in the configure-patches-window:
max. no of competitors -->patches/competitors
competitor start times -->patches/competitors
no. towns -->patches/??
no. industries -->patches/??
max loan -->patches/economy
init. interest -->patches/economy
veh. running costs -->patches/vehicles
constr. speed -->patches/competitors
int. of competitors -->patches/competitors
veh. breakdowns -->patches/vehicles
subsidy mult. -->patches/economy
cost of construction -->patches/construction
terrain type -->patches/??
quantity of sea/lakes -->patches/??
economy -->patches/economy
train reversing -->patches/vehicles
disasters -->patches/??
city council... -->patches/??

The ??-settings may be grouped in a new category (environment?).
The game-options-window could also be placed in a new category.

All this settings (patches+difficulty+game options) could be divided into two groups:
-normal/standard(or something like that)-settings: Standard settings contain the basic things (settings from the old difficulty+options-window, mapsize, etc.)
-advanced-settings:mainly the old patch-settings. They could be hidden per default, and be enabled by a checkbox at the top of the window).

That way the settings are not overcrowded for the newbies and the advanced-players can activate the additional settings when needed.

BJH

[Dundee]

I've been thinking about this since my last post.

There are, at the moment, game options (what terrain type and size is this game?), player options (how far apart are my signals to be placed?) and server options (does this server have a password?). These have been split and mixed together in four places: 'Configure patches', 'Game options', 'Difficulty' and also the multiplayer window. The original game options have been left largely untouched, in Sawyer's original layout, and any new options have been added to the patches window.

I think it's time to break from the old game in this regard.

I propose the settings are, instead, split up as follows:



Game options
What:
these are set for each game. In a multiplayer game, the owner of the server controls these options.

How:
Selected on a window which fits in between clicking 'new game' and starting the new game, or in a menu in-game.

Extra:
Profiles could be created so that different combinations of settings can be saved/loaded easily. Some simple profiles could be included (eg. 'Australia' might include options such as sub-tropical + drive on left + dollars).

Where:
a new profiles directory, './profiles/last' would contain the most recently used game profile.

Includes:
* All of difficulty window (except possibly train reversing).

* 'Game Options' except autosave, screen resolution, language, units, screenshot format
* patches: all of Construction except signal spacing, realistic acceleration, long trains, goto depot orders, road vehicle queueing, depot finding, pathfinding, vehicles never expire, max vehicle counts, all of Stations, all of Economy, all of Competitors



Player options
What:
these options are set by each player and are generally more static. Most people would have one preference for signal distance, units, screen resolution, etc.

How:
A window off the main menu, a dialog off a menu in-game.

Where:
./player.cfg

Includes:
* possibly Train reversing (from difficulty window)
* autosave, screen resolution, language, units, screenshot format
* patches: all of Interface, signal spacing, train income warning, review vehicle orders, lost train settings, autorenew, service intervals, disable servicing if no breakdowns.



Server options
What:
Options for a server for a multiplayer game. These options have no real bearing on the playing of the game, they are more concerned with establishing a connection and establishing the settings for chat.

How:
On (or on a dialog off) the 'new multiplayer game' window.

Extra:
the existing multiplayer dialog is already separated nicely, so there isn't much to change here.

Where:
./server.cfg

Includes:
* Connection type
* Port
* Maximum clients
* Language spoken
* Password
* Banlist


Each of these groups could, if necessary, be split into further categorisations.

Any comments?