Is OTTD getting to complex?

[AntoninKyrene]

Quoting Expresso:
Actually, the whole GUI could use a facelift, it's stuck in the ninetees while GUI ideas have advanced quite a bit. This also serves to confuse new users as they are used to modern interfaces, which function quite differently.


That brings up an interesting question: are we trying to preserve a 1990's game or replace a 1990's game?

I like the GUI and think it would be a disappointment if the GUI was radically changed from that of the original game model. If you are thinking about a whole new GUI, I would suggest that is more appropriate for OTTD v2. There is a difference between evolution and further refinement, a difference that could be very hard to define, but the GUI is one of those areas where the game would cease to be TT circa 1994.

I see the time coming when this game is going to branch into two separate projects: continued tinkering with the original concept and an outright redevelopment into a game with a 2010-based look and feel.

[andythenorth]

I see the time coming when this game is going to branch into two separate projects

That would probably be the start of the end of ottd as a successful project.

[HvS]

Quoting Expresso:
Actually, the whole GUI could use a facelift, it's stuck in the ninetees while GUI ideas have advanced quite a bit. This also serves to confuse new users as they are used to modern interfaces, which function quite differently.


That brings up an interesting question: are we trying to preserve a 1990's game or replace a 1990's game?

Whatever the goal is, there is no incentive to try to respond to the needs of "confused new users" - openttd is not a commercial game, it does not have to embrace as many people as possible. Thus there is no incentive to cater to wide audience. Heck, I'd even go as far as to say that the general public won't "buy" OpenTTD with any GUI: in its essence it is not an "angry birds" type of a game with broad casual user base. It is a project for certain specific players who have a certain penchant to building transport networks - that penchant is a prerequisite for adoption of the game, not a nice and modern GUI.

[Dave]

I see the time coming when this game is going to branch into two separate projects

That would probably be the start of the end of ottd as a successful project.

Forks would definitely kill it. Forkinhell.

[Expresso]

The settings and windows in general are a complete mess. On top of that, some settings and menu items could use more descriptive strings.

"Newgrf settings" and "AI settings", which are accessible from multiple locations, are just two examples. "Newgrf settings" could be changed to "game mods" or "game moddifications", since that's what they are; you can change the entire game using these files. "AI settings" could be changed to "Competitors" or "Computer competitors".

Moving the 4 landscape type buttons from the main menu window to a popup showing up when you are hovering over the "new game" button would be nice too; not everybody needs to select a landscape there.

In addition to that there are some settings in the "difficulty settings" window, which are changeable in the "new game" window too (where it's much more applicable).

The date format selection should be in the options screen, instead of advanced settings. Basically, anything which a beginning/intermediate player might want to change should be moved to "options" or "difficulty settings", instead of "advanced settings".

Anything in "advanced settings" should really be anything normally not understood (such as the pathfinder used for vehicle type X or the vehicle loading algorhytm used). The tree placement algorhytm and the landscape generator used are among the things which should be moved there.

To be honest, I still believe that moving all the windows to squirrel scripts is the best solution. This allows for modding and different GUIs for mobile devices, desktops, lower and higher resolutions. In addition to that it nets the devs the result that they don't need to bother much with the GUI of a given feature; the community will do that for them (which a lot less people will do when they need to dig in the source of the game itself). All they need to provide is a decent API and some example GUIs (the default GUI, perhaps). AntoninKyrene, you could then stick to the ninetees GUI, while I move on to a modern GUI or install a GUI suited for my mobile phone, for example

[John_Smith]

AntoninKyrene, I see where you are coming form, however in my personal view OTTD will never lost its 1990’s feel to it, the graphics, and the gameplay will always insure that. However everything can do with an update once in a while, and with the game expanding, with one-way roads, drive through road stops and vehicle lists, the front of the game has not been updated with that. A new and updates setting on the front screen will help the flow of movement and the overall enjoyment of the end users.

Very nice ideas Expresso, just some pointers:

- “Newgrf Settings” changing name to “Game mods” I like that as it explain what it does more clearly and in most other game there are called ‘mods’¬¬. So would be better.

- “AI Settings” change name to “Computer Competitors” is also good also.

- On moving the four landscape setting to in the “New Game” menu I understand what you are saying. I too do not think that there are not well placed there, however this would led to problems in the “Scenario Editor”, which relies four landscape selected on the front screen. This could be overcome by letting the Editor having its own setting screen, to choose the landscape, the size of map, ect. In the long term this would better as the user will longer have to go in the ‘New Game’ menu to make the map array for the ‘Editor’.

- Yes the best solution would be to make a flexible system able to cope with a range of devices and systems for the future grow in mobile devices such as tablets and netbooks.

John Smith.

[FooBar]

"Game mods" is the wrong word here IMO. NewGRFs don't modify the game core like mods for other games do, they're more a sort of addon. So if you insist on renaming, "Add-on Settings" or "Graphic Add-on Settings" seems more appropriate to me. Either way, both are not ideal. AIs are essentially add-ons (or mods if you will) as well, while NewGRFs are just that. And NewGRFs are more than graphic add-ons as well, as there are a number of NewGRFs that don't provide graphics.

Also, I don't think much people will have problems understanding the concept of NewGRF. A number of things in the Online Content are labeled as such, and it only makes sense to go into NewGRF Settings to configure them. Same goes for AI essentially.

[Sabre_Justice]

"Game mods" is the wrong word here IMO. NewGRFs don't modify the game core like mods for other games do, they're more a sort of addon. So if you insist on renaming, "Add-on Settings" or "Graphic Add-on Settings" seems more appropriate to me. Either way, both are not ideal. AIs are essentially add-ons (or mods if you will) as well, while NewGRFs are just that. And NewGRFs are more than graphic add-ons as well, as there are a number of NewGRFs that don't provide graphics.

Also, I don't think much people will have problems understanding the concept of NewGRF. A number of things in the Online Content are labeled as such, and it only makes sense to go into NewGRF Settings to configure them. Same goes for AI essentially.

Adding to the core game is still a modification to it- basically a mod. A fanmade file for say, Fallout New Vegas that added a new gun or two while otherwise not changing the game would still be called a mod. Changing the way a gun looks would be called a mod. Pretty much all stuff that involves fans working to make their own unofficial content and changes to games is called modding, let's just call a spade a spade.

As for OTTD's mass appeal, it depends... Transport Tycoon isn't really a complex game unless you want it to be, the core gameplay as designed is pretty simple and easy once you know what you're doing, and anyone who's played the original TTD (which is a LOT of people) can pick it up pretty damn quickly. Mods may add more stuff, but they're just that-mods, optional and with the complex settings usually hidden away in their own little menus, while the gameplay on the surface is pretty much indistinguishable.

[V453000 :)]

Seriously, you people mind that "mod" would explain more to you than "newGRF" ? I find that quite stupid but anyway:

- when I read a "mod" I have really no clue what is that going to do
- when I read a "newGRF" or "GRF" it quite tells me that it changes something graphically (which is what most of them do)

and at the same time I see no reason to call it "mods" just because the other games for the masses call it...

I can see that this thread is trying to "simplify" openttd interface which I am quite satisfied with. But I think such "improvements" should mean mainly systematic changes like what is where just like people already talked about here, not changing words, particularly something like a newGRF which is already used for quite a few years and sounds far less dumb than a "mod".

[FooBar]

Pretty much all stuff that involves fans working to make their own unofficial content and changes to games is called modding

You've hit the nail on the hammer (or whatever that saying goes). NewGRFs are official, the game core facilitates them and is fully aware of them. What you find in the development forum, that would be mods. But I guess we have to agree to disagree.

[Sabre_Justice]

Seriously, you people mind that "mod" would explain more to you than "newGRF" ? I find that quite stupid but anyway:

- when I read a "mod" I have really no clue what is that going to do
- when I read a "newGRF" or "GRF" it quite tells me that it changes something graphically (which is what most of them do)

and at the same time I see no reason to call it "mods" just because the other games for the masses call it...

I can see that this thread is trying to "simplify" openttd interface which I am quite satisfied with. But I think such "improvements" should mean mainly systematic changes like what is where just like people already talked about here, not changing words, particularly something like a newGRF which is already used for quite a few years and sounds far less dumb than a "mod".

The thing is, though, NewGRFs from what I understand are more than reskins, which is what most people would think 'graphical improvements' are, because they add entirely new vehicles with new stats and performances. If you're talking about how OTTD appears to people not completely familiar with it, you need to look at things objectively. You'd be hard pressed to convince someone that something like FIRS, a total conversion of the industry and economy system that radically changes the core gameplay, is a 'new graphic'.

You've hit the nail on the hammer (or whatever that saying goes). NewGRFs are official, the game core facilitates them and is fully aware of them. What you find in the development forum, that would be mods. But I guess we have to agree to disagree.

With a game like OTTD, the lines are pretty much completely blurred.

[John_Smith]

Yes “NewGRF Settings” is a changing of the game, so called “modding”. I see your point V453000 , “NewGRF Settings” is only changing the graphics and there are different setting menus that change things more like a ‘modding tools’.

John Smith

[Sabre_Justice]

I mean I'd understand the idea of NewGRF if, say, you downloaded one called 'Thomas the Tank Engine' that changed the sprite of a default steam train to a blue tank engine with a smiling face. But when it adds an entirely new steam engine called independent of the existing trains, called 'Thomas' and with its own stats and performance, I think that crosses the line into a mod.

[andythenorth]

Newgrfs are Add-ons.

Try pictures for this spec stuff. It works better when designing GUIs

[V453000 :)]

I mean I'd understand the idea of NewGRF if, say, you downloaded one called 'Thomas the Tank Engine' that changed the sprite of a default steam train to a blue tank engine with a smiling face. But when it adds an entirely new steam engine called independent of the existing trains, called 'Thomas' and with its own stats and performance, I think that crosses the line into a mod.

Right, so you would like to recognize graphics and mods. Therefore we could have 2 categories instead of one. That is what I call simplification!

[Sabre_Justice]

I mean I'd understand the idea of NewGRF if, say, you downloaded one called 'Thomas the Tank Engine' that changed the sprite of a default steam train to a blue tank engine with a smiling face. But when it adds an entirely new steam engine called independent of the existing trains, called 'Thomas' and with its own stats and performance, I think that crosses the line into a mod.

Right, so you would like to recognize graphics and mods. Therefore we could have 2 categories instead of one. That is what I call simplification!

You're confusing the issue and you know it. 'Graphics' would be a category of 'Mods', along with new vehicles and industries, town name lists, etc etc.

[XeryusTC]

NewGRFs are add-ons not mods. 'Mod' stands for modification and it basically means that it has altered game files to change the behaviour of the game. NewGRFs do not do this, instead the code of OTTD supports them and thus you can simply call them add-ons or plugins (if you take the route Firefox etc takes).

[Sabre_Justice]

There's games that officially support modding and still call them mods (Half-Life and Source games, Fallout, ModNation anyone?) but this is all semantics, any name that's obvious would work fine. 'NewGRF' is just jargon though, and a bit confusing for new players.

[V453000 :)]

So the new player tries to add a newgrf and at that moment he gets to understand what it is. Problem is... ?

[John_Smith]

I think that this is getting way, way too far advanced and off-topic. Talking about what a button is called when the background setting decision is what this is about.

John.