Polycount 3.0 design restrictions
polycounter lvl 18
This should be interesting...
There were four major design restrictions for the new Polycount 3.0 design. If you want to criticize the new design, these points are the off-limits ones, since we had to work within them. If you want to produce a new mockup, your design must also conform to these design restrictions unless you can offer substantial evidence that our initial assumptions were wrong.
Remember, just because you do or like something a certain way, doesn't mean everyone does. Give reasons and justifications for your decisions.
<ul type="square">
[*]Restriction the First: There must be an advertisement. There are three ad sizes, pick one: Leaderboard, 728x90; Medium Rectangle, 300x250; or Skyscraper, 160x600. If you use the Leaderboard, it must go at the top of the page, and the others should be either close to the top or embedded in the content (e.g. the medium rectangle ad after the first news article like you see on some newspaper sites).
[*]Restriction the Second: The front page design has to be accesible to n00bs. If the boards are the heart of the community, then the front page is t-shirt covering the torso that encases the heart. It's the first thing someone unaffiliated with Polycount sees, so it has to explain what Polycount is, it has to summarize what's going on with the community (e.g. the boards), and it has to drive people to the boards so they can participate. As previously discussed, PMPs for six year old games are not part of the general gaming public any more, which is why there's no model list. If you want to do a "game model of the month" gallery or something, fine, but justify your reason behind including it.
[*]Restriction the Third: It has to be designed for 800x600. I know, I know, you're like, wtf. But the truth is that most people don't browse at 1600x1200 with their browser maximized, and since the site has to be accessible to Polycount virgins, we have to accomodate that. Statistically, even people at 1024x768 have their browser windowed, and the average (or was it median? I don't remember) size of that window was roughly the same as 800x600, maybe a little bigger, but not enough to make it worth it. This means your "above the fold" viewable space is like 740x400. Now, there are ways around that: you can have "bonus columns" of optional content that's visible if you're running wider, but that just isn't there if you're not, so there's no horizontal scrolling. If you go this route, each "bonus column" should be no more than 220px wide, but can be smaller than that. The ad cannot be in a bonus column.
[*]Restriction the Fourth: The design has to extend to sub-pages of content: articles, model galleries and POTD lists. While there aren't examples of this in the new design beyond the "rendering in progress" page, rest assured that the new design does work for other types of body content. If you're doing a mockup, you need to provide not a just a front-page design, but a sub-page example, too. [/list]
Maybe now we can move beyond "gay" and "shit" as criticisms, hmm?
There were four major design restrictions for the new Polycount 3.0 design. If you want to criticize the new design, these points are the off-limits ones, since we had to work within them. If you want to produce a new mockup, your design must also conform to these design restrictions unless you can offer substantial evidence that our initial assumptions were wrong.
Remember, just because you do or like something a certain way, doesn't mean everyone does. Give reasons and justifications for your decisions.
<ul type="square">
[*]Restriction the First: There must be an advertisement. There are three ad sizes, pick one: Leaderboard, 728x90; Medium Rectangle, 300x250; or Skyscraper, 160x600. If you use the Leaderboard, it must go at the top of the page, and the others should be either close to the top or embedded in the content (e.g. the medium rectangle ad after the first news article like you see on some newspaper sites).
[*]Restriction the Second: The front page design has to be accesible to n00bs. If the boards are the heart of the community, then the front page is t-shirt covering the torso that encases the heart. It's the first thing someone unaffiliated with Polycount sees, so it has to explain what Polycount is, it has to summarize what's going on with the community (e.g. the boards), and it has to drive people to the boards so they can participate. As previously discussed, PMPs for six year old games are not part of the general gaming public any more, which is why there's no model list. If you want to do a "game model of the month" gallery or something, fine, but justify your reason behind including it.
[*]Restriction the Third: It has to be designed for 800x600. I know, I know, you're like, wtf. But the truth is that most people don't browse at 1600x1200 with their browser maximized, and since the site has to be accessible to Polycount virgins, we have to accomodate that. Statistically, even people at 1024x768 have their browser windowed, and the average (or was it median? I don't remember) size of that window was roughly the same as 800x600, maybe a little bigger, but not enough to make it worth it. This means your "above the fold" viewable space is like 740x400. Now, there are ways around that: you can have "bonus columns" of optional content that's visible if you're running wider, but that just isn't there if you're not, so there's no horizontal scrolling. If you go this route, each "bonus column" should be no more than 220px wide, but can be smaller than that. The ad cannot be in a bonus column.
[*]Restriction the Fourth: The design has to extend to sub-pages of content: articles, model galleries and POTD lists. While there aren't examples of this in the new design beyond the "rendering in progress" page, rest assured that the new design does work for other types of body content. If you're doing a mockup, you need to provide not a just a front-page design, but a sub-page example, too. [/list]
Maybe now we can move beyond "gay" and "shit" as criticisms, hmm?
Replies
The "polycount" at the top isn't aligned with anything. It looks like you were trying to make the "poly" part of the black BG and the "count" with the green, did half the job, and said "good enough!". Either put all of the "poly" in the black and the "count" in the green or just align it with all the other text. Having the "poly" against the face doesn't look too great (these types of "reversals" [used loosely] look better against solid colors). I'd say align it with the text blocks as it is making me uneasy having a single line of text hang over.
I think what Noel was getting at with the navigation is that it is just text without any style to it. Like you typed out "forums [space] [space] [space] [space] | [space] [space] [space] chat...etc" which looks amateurish. Not sure if the dotted underline is needed. It's pretty obvious thats a navigation bar. It works a lot better where it might not be noticeable (like in the news articles, headers, etc.). Personally, I like different font color for links rather than underlines. Also, the "polycount" only underlines when you hover over it which is breaking the uniformity of the underlined text links (always underlined). The ad at the top has an underline all the time which is breaking the uniformity of the non-underlined image links (the thumbnails). Pick a format and stick with it throughout the page.
Please don't run the text to the edge of the screen. For one it is somewhat hard to read (made easier with the larger fonts) and second, it's always nice to have a little buffer room around anything. Pull it back a bit so my eye doesn't feel like it's going to fall off the page.
Sometimes only half the face loads for me (links, articles, and models page). =\
I agree with Noel about the horizontal lines dividing news items. It helps to keep things in nice little packages. Maybe a horizontal line isn't your thing, but even adding an extra line break would help. There is an equal amount of room between new paragraphs and the end of articles and news headlines. Sure, I'm not stupid and can distinguish that it's the start of a new story, but it makes it that much easier to read.
It looks doable to me, just needs some polish and lovin.
EDIT: And for only being restricted to 800x600, Id use every pixel efficiently. Basically squish that left hand bar down a little so youve got some extra wiggle room.
the current look, however, is all my fault. we were kicking around some ideas behind closed doors and i stepped up to the plate. in my meager defense, this was my mockup:
now one of the big and immediately obvious differences is the change in banner ad size. in my mockup, i was assuming the smaller banner size, which ended up not being the case. so basically, the entire header (possibly most of the rest of the design) just doesn't work anymore, on account of the actual requirements as Vito has elucidated.
but forget about that... i'll post a redesign myself, but most of you have already expressed your opinions of my giant-font-crazy site design
Spacey: i hope my posting the mockup makes it clear why there are certain alignment problems with the logo and such. you bring up a lot of good points, thanks for contributing to the discussion. we'll get it all ironed out in not too long!
Since some of you don't know how "bonus columns" work, here's an example: size your browser down to 800x600 and visit this page on CollyLogic. Then maximize your window. See that third column that magically just shows up? That's a bonus column. It's a bonus for running your browser at a higher resolution than normal people (e.g. a bonus for being a dedicated polycounter), but it's only a bonus; it's also nothing a normal person would miss out on. Does that make sense?
Also, regarding Spacey's comment about 800x600, that means the body content has to fit in 740px of width. Here's an example: visit the new Polycount front page and slowly start resizing your browser narrower and narrower. See how the banner ad at the top start moving back to the left, covering up the top of the smiley? The whole body column can be floated in the middle of page or something, with backgrounds of models and things in the left and right gutters or something, as long as the body column can also cover them up if the browser width is too small.
Hope that clears those two things up.
Does 'catering to noobs' mean you have to cater to the blind? Every font face in there feels about 4x the size it should be. I naturally checked my font scale size in the browser to make sure i didnt accidentally scale them up to the 'Elderly size.'
I agree with Thnom too, i miss the old font / graphic
I have no problems with 800x600 restrictions, i think more sites should rely on this as it makes for a very sound, and clean site layout.
My biggest initial gut wrenching pains come from the lack of professionalism, and font sizes.
and the fonts are likely to be smaller, too.
as far as the professionalism, this is the place to address it. so let's have more specific talk of what you'd like to see, rather than all the things you don't like about the current in progress design. it's very clear a lot of people don't like it, this is not adding to the discussion
http://boards.polycount.net/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=1&page=0
Forum green (muddy) with the florescent like green works fine (as long as the font isn't bold). I think if we're gonna start merging in other colours i think they need to match the forum; with the blue and red.
Personally I think the design is best handled by one person, and one person only. Someone that has a proven track record of decent design sense perhaps. And If some people don't like that design, tough shit. Just an idea.
as for what i mean:
the design of the banner, links, and body copy flows, so that your eye can travel around the site. I really, really loved the 'POTD' from the old site, and even CGTalks 'front page' stuff. In order to make it not feel clunky, it would need its own 'style set,' ie all images will be 162x120px, or whatever.
In addition to that, it feels like a stream of conciousness layout as opposed to having areas of interest, areas of function, and areas of copy. Inrest being Pictures of the Day/Week, Featured articles/models, ad banners, the forums, and links. Functional elements being major links, and other things that make the site navigation and content display work. Finally, content being news, model lists, searched text, images, etc.
I agree with daz, designing by commitee is difficult, and 80% of the time impossible. Iterative design with feedback (from a private linked location) however works.
I have no doubts you guys will make it sick, just providing feedback, because it seems this thread was requesting it.
this front page is still intended to service a community, so we're hoping to come up with a front page that will prove useful to polycounters, not just something they stumble into or look on nostalgically. so we're taking some suggestions about how improvements like that can be factored in... otherwise, why not just clear the whole damn thin off and put a giant "click here to visit the forums" button?
the design will still be handled by one person. i'm hoping to conscript seduce hawken into the duty, because i've always admired his design sense. and he doesn't even have to do the dirty work, either--vito's a wizard when it comes to htmlizing a design layout.
moose: thanks, that does clarify and help me and the others working on this know what you mean.
plus, i always thought hawken is a very talented designer, i never meant to bash him nor did i even know he designed that smiley. sorry for any offence --
still i do think that smiley is gay. but hey, whatever pulls your finger :*
focus on function, menus, site structure, and that kind of thing first before the pretty stuff. It's boring, but it usually helps with semi-complex sites.
if anybody found my opinion offensive, i'm sorry that he did - but that's his own ego at work.
might as well put the ego aside and admit the fact the the majority don't like it.
and that per sux
No offence intended but I don't think this thread is going to get too far. Clearly every man and his dog around here fancies himself as a graphic designer, and design by commitee doesn't work. Trust me, I know.
Personally I think the design is best handled by one person, and one person only. Someone that has a proven track record of decent design sense perhaps. And If some people don't like that design, tough shit. Just an idea.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed, you can't please everyone. It's not like the regulars are going to stop hanging around if they don't like the new design.
edit: oh, and your body copy in places is actually pretty funny. don't let it go to your head, though.
np Gauss, it is hard to judge and say "ok, lets professionalize this!"
one last thing:
While i dig the harsh line of going black to green, you may want to consider solidifying that idea with the rest of the images associated with the site. Having a nice, soft shaded smiley face in the background sharpens that transition even more than it currently is.
scales to any rez
You guys might start with a site wireframe, so nobody gets caught up with imagery:
focus on function, menus, site structure, and that kind of thing first before the pretty stuff. It's boring, but it usually helps with semi-complex sites.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now this Idea I like.
I think websites should follow the same rules as skins: The contrast should still be there after you desaturate it.
and post some work damnet
Its VERY unfinished, but you can see a few core things:
The right side menu is for the front page only and would be discarded on the other pages.
The left menu could be dropped, or a skyscraper advert could be used. Or it can be used for a complete sidemap.
A think a SEARCH box is VITAL to the new site.
There should't be a light brown halo around the logo - that was just me being sloppy
That said, I'm part of the few who don't get the point behind the huge fonts and dominance war logo used as key visual elements. While I agree that the forum linking should certainly gain a bigger importance on the home page (hence the huge news text, competition-related logo and wip forum images if I follow your idea), I feel like that kind of strong refocus takes some very important things away from the site, both on the visual *and* philosophical aspects.
I personnaly feel like polycount.com is more than a forum-opening page. By this I mean that if I ever want to try and implement a model in a game engine, whatever gen it belongs to, all I need to do is to hit PC and browse the resources links. JK, UT, whatever, every tool and/or info is here or linked from here. And while it's true that editing ressources like UDN are officially here for that, they don't always have everything writen down. I actually remember that the first UT2K3 tut was seen here, and not there.
I know it might not seem crucial in portfolio developpement, but I feel like knowing a few engines is an invaluable skill in a professional environnement. Not only because you know engine X or Y, but because you are familiar with their restrictions and possibilities. I cannot wait to see models like Rockstar's general being ported to UT2007, cannot wait to do a model of mine for that engine, and cannot wait to see all that piling up on the frontpage 'new models' list...
I strongly believe that the visual design should follow that. I hate cluttered designs, yet I cannot stand to have to hunt fo information. Stripping down the design to a mere forum frontpage hence kills most of the 'technical' side of polycount which is indeed what makes it a great ressources for artists in need of cool tools. To make things move, in game.
This, however, just my two Euro cents
(KDR : I disagree with your comment about contrast. Color contrast is as important as value contrast. Yet desaturation is still a great trick sometimes
Rick, why do you think search is so important? Did you use the news search on the old site? Do you use the forum search now? Would it search both news and forums or just news or just models or what?
Pior, you're right that people used to come to Polycount to find out how to get PPMs into any game. But these days, game engine developers (Epic, id, Valve, CryTech) have their own support websites that have this information available (UDN, idDevNet, VDC, Crymod). No-one looks to get their model into "any" game they can: PPMs are all but dead, which means they're doing it for a mod, which means they're all over the official support website anyway. I think the best thing we can do is provide regularly updated resource links to the official docs, rather than do things up from scratch ourselves, unless, you know, it means scooping the actual devs.
Finally, given that this is a game modeling and art site... why does the text dominate in most of these mockups? Where are the mockups that focus on all the pretty art from the forums, with it taking up most of the room on the page? Just curious about your rationales behind that.
Here's what I came up with this morning.
And the much worse 1st run late last night:
1st Crappy design
Naw, these days I'm fed up with drilling through menus to find stuff.
Real world example. Today we had to go to the dump to get rid of stuff since we are moving house. We had not been to the dump near us in Edinburgh, so we went to the council website to find out where it as. There was NO search feature.
After 10-25 minutes (this is NO LIE!) we gave up, and drove around for 20 minutes to find it.
Aileen WORKS for the council
Anyway, if I wanted to know ho to export an UT2003 character from max, I'd rather type "ut 2004 export max" into a search box than try to find it.
You just phrased it the way I dreamt it!
All that technical should really be kept in focus. To me having a model in engine, or presented just like if it was, is crucial. It sortof 'validates' it, and I am under the impression that polycount-breed artists have that particular 'validated' feel, maybe simply because game cg is less forgiving than film cg in many regards. Can't hide anything.
All in one... I think that the missing item is a Ressources or Tools link next to articles, forum, models, whatever. Atm it dosen't scream 'gameart' anymore, and even if ppms are not as popular as they used to be (not harder to make tho) game art is still what ilt's all about, and the new design(s) kindof killed that for a more yetanothercgportail website.
If someone wants to learn how to, say, display normalmaps in a realtime manner, and don't know where to start hunting for tips and recommendations, PC should be the place where such info is easily available. Awesome tool writers like Ben Cloward, JIStyles, Martinez or Santiago don't belong to either UDN or IDdevnet, yet their work is invaluable to game artists. They really belong to the main PC portail imho.
Haha now you know how to make me happy
Good luck for the whole thing guys! I hope I'm not sounding like some obsessed dick. I just love that place so much, and want to do my my best to help making it even better!
In the links section id put modding links to all the diffrent companys how to import a model in to their game pages. That way PC becomes more of a hub for modding so that we become more of a one stop shopping for learning how to get models into games.
Id also make a catagory in the links for refrence sites just like the thread in 2d/3d.
Another good link would be to the gamedev map so that everyone would know what companys were around them.
Lastly id have a list of curent members portfolio sites.
thats my two cents.
i'm sure that'd probably take a bit longer to update on regular basis, but if you managed to set it up so that everything can be at least sort of automated it shouldn't be that big of a deal. I'm not really a coder or web guru, still i'm pretty sure it could be made manageble.
Oh wait, there's lot's of people in here disagreeing with each other! What a fucking surprise! Hate to sound like a smug fuck but kinda brings me back to my earlier point quite nicely dont it? ;-)
PS, that looks cool Scooby, and I like Ricks stuff too! LOL Also, where is Hawkens stab at things goddamit?!
PPS: I am gonna make a Jean Luc Picard model just to spite Cheep goddamit ;-) I love modeling ze bald headed men