GUI consistency

[prissi]

When I start to do designing programming the GUI of OTTD I found it highly incosistent. For instance in the station window, there is the button showing acceptance/ratings/etc. that changes its text accordingly. Nearly exactly the same functionality is achieved in the train command window via greyed out buttons. So I think some style guide is needed. Another example is the "go to location" function, which is sometimes a text button, sometime an eye.

Next thing is, that nearly similar dialoges are not similar. I.e. the train details, bus details, ship and airplane details should be similar. However, the train uses seperator, while the other do not use them. Also the bus window is larger (10px) than the airplane window.

But most important (sorry for the wrong order) is the imho bad choice you have. In the vehicle window, there are (modal) buttons for goto location, stopping, reversing, orders, ... which are changing in a depot and depend on the vehicle type. However, many important information like freight and income can be only find in a subwindow, while the speed (imho not of outmost importance) is show directly.

Just on the vehicle dialoge:
I think it would be a much better usability to have a common design for all vehicles. Also the more important or the more often used a function is, the more urgent is a button in the first dialoge. Also on could think of folding open the vehicle dialoges instead open another one for details (which closes anyway together with the main one).

The second attachment shows a mockup for a new universal vehicle dialog. All the "stopping, reverse, goto depot, ..." stuff could be accessed via the order dialog, and the "refit, cargo details, income, ..." stuff could be in the details dialoge. Jumping on the location could be just done via left or rightclick into the main image.

The same of course is true with many other dialoges (who also often show too many informations, violating "the rule of seven"). Not to mention the tiny icon buttons will be hard to hit on a large screen. Maybe most users got used to it, but it is not that what is suggested by good user interface design.

However, I will happily take all the beating, if I am proven wrong.

[Darkvater]

Well, we could have a look at the vehicle details window but I don't think any deep gui changes, especially to frequently-used windows will be appreciated.

For example the vehicle-view window. We've been used to it for 10 years, and changing it would start an outrage. So I think such changes are out of the question.

[prissi]

I though so. This was just to illustrate the problem. The GUI is far from self-explaining, even the help is not straight forward. And very much consistency is lacking.

(But I confess this is a little an outsider view, since I encoutered OTTD after I did encounter simutrans and some others. Maybe therefore, I had my troubles with the OTTD interface. Even now I am not sure, what the signal button in the vehicle window is good for. And it took some time to find out, that refit is only visible in depots.)

However, some consistency might be appriciated, by the developer as well as by the users. Also thinking about sime guidelines (i.e. the greyed out "tabs" versus button with changing names) could help to keep the gui more consitent. In the moment, I have the impression, it goes like "ahh I found here a space for another button".

There are code guidelines, maybe there should be GUI guidelines. Simple ones, like "prefer changing button text", or buttons should be preferably at the bottom, state should be indicated by a graphic. Or "scrolling lists should have a seperator" (or don`t). Or all vehicle dialogs should have a width of 360 pixels, all station related ones ... (It does not need to be the Apple stringency.) Maybe slowly some dialoges can correct the biggest omissions (like the buttons in the title bar). However, even some GUI rules would help (at least me).

[DaleStan]

Even now I am not sure, what the signal button in the vehicle window is good for.

What happens when you right-click on that button? Just about everything has a right-click tooltip.

[prissi]

I did know there are help texts, i did add them to the pasenger patch too, but I did not know how to show them. (Maybe they should show like window help text, after ten seconds or so. Otherwise people may not find them by try and error. Or I am too stupid for this?!)

[klogg]

Maybe they should show like window help text, after ten seconds or so. Otherwise people may not find them by try and error. Or I am too stupid for this?!

Good point!
When I don't know what a certain symbol means
I'm afraid to rightclick it as something bad may happen.
Safest way to learn is - don't move and watch.

And yes, I played TT 10 years ago...
AND SINCE THE FIRST DAY I get really annyed about the vehicle deatils window
because I have to click and scroll way to often to see the carriage of my trains!!!
One vote for a change

klogg

[DaleStan]

It sure looks to me like somebody made that window resizable.

If you're quite sure its not resizable, I think a screenshot, so we're sure we're talking about the same window, is in order.

[gkirilov]

I think it will be nice if the (default) size of all windows and the size of the buttons is increased. With all the high resolutions that are used nowadays it's not convenient trying to click on a mini-button.

p.s. I like the right click tooltip. This way you can show it immediately and not waiting for x seconts for it to appear.

[Bjarni]

For example the vehicle-view window. We've been used to it for 10 years, and changing it would start an outrage

Well, he said something like that when I changed the vehicle view window to move the speed to the top right corner, so I never finished coding it. The outrage came from Darkvater when I showed a screenshot of "work in progress"

I don't think it's a good idea to extend that window that much by default, so maybe keep it as it is now and add a button to show/hide the list in the same window by changing window size. Maybe it should show total cargo instead of cargo in each unit as well.

We should figure out if we want to change the GUI and what we would like and if we should stick to the "don't change familiar GUI" policy.

We should also consider the usage of player/other player windows. Look at the vehicle orders window. There are two different windows, one for your vehicles and one for other player's vehicles. There is also difference between trains and all the other vehicle types, but that makes more sense (no non-stop orders for aircraft and so on).

[prissi]

I would like to know the policy about: Greyed out means selected (like in trains) or unselectable? Should the scrolles list have horizontal lines like trains or no lines like in the stations? Height of a single text line 13 or 14? Default button height (maybe a little larger than now, i.e. 16?) Goto location always using the eye icon (instead the text)? Changable buttons at the bottom (but for sort criteria for list)?

These could help to make new dialoges conform to the ideal OTTD-GUI.

[peter1138]

Something like this, maybe...

[Bjarni]

I would like to know the policy about

Well, here is how I think it should be done (and is doing whenever I change something)

Greyed out means selected (like in trains) or unselectable?

unselectable. Selected should use pressed state.

Should the scrolles list have horizontal lines like trains or no lines like in the stations?

I prefer a line between each line.

Height of a single text line 13 or 14? Default button height (maybe a little larger than now, i.e. 16?)

I don't know. I presume some tests will show what looks the best.

Goto location always using the eye icon (instead the text)?

Sounds reasonable to try to keep it consistent. However I think it would be best if a window sticks to either sprites or text buttons, at least not mixing them in the same row.

Changable buttons at the bottom (but for sort criteria for list)?

What do you mean by this?

These could help to make new dialoges conform to the ideal OTTD-GUI.

yeah, we should certainly not accept any window or make new window design a guessing game until it looks right. We should also add coding standards for window behaviour like adding widget enums.


Note: I just wrote what I think. I didn't state any rules anybody agreed on and wrote somewhere. We will/should do that eventually.

[prissi]

Note: I just wrote what I think. I didn't state any rules anybody agreed on and wrote somewhere. We will/should do that eventually.

That was was the initial purpose. I thank you for your comments.

I like to aks two points:
If there are more than one choice (e.g. the acceptance button in the station info) should it be done with a changing text or like in the train window with different buttons in a row (which looks a little crowdy)? [Or is there a tab-widget planned?]

Also buttons to do something (e.g. renaming, changing orders, ... ) should be generally in the lower part of a dialoge?

EDIT:
Would such an vehicle detail info be too radical?