Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

I'll consider it. Take a look at the current layout, please.

Personally I dislike underlined links inside blocks of text, I think they make the page look messy.
I think it would be better to remove underlining from paragraph titles or from links inside text.

If underlining is being removed from links I'd make links a deep, dark red and leave highlight color the bright red it is now.

My 2cp

I like the new layout. The new logo is really sharp and is useful in communicating the "old school" feel of the game.

The bottom with the main portion and the smaller "news" column is much cleaner and works very well. One note on that. The overflow/float settings are such that the main text and the news column have a maximum width they will use. A lot of monitors nowadays (and pretty much all new ones) are widescreen monitors. I'm using a wide screen monitor now, and even without maximizing the window, the main text and news column only take 2/3rds of the screen. As a side effect, it does set off the download buttons and version number very strongly.

artikid wrote:Personally I dislike underlined links inside blocks of text, I think they make the page look messy.
I think it would be better to remove underlining from paragraph titles or from links inside text.

If underlining is being removed from links I'd make links a deep, dark red and leave highlight color the bright red it is now.

My 2cp

As a software developer and both a GUI user and designer, I like the underlined links. It lets people know those are useful links and the user isn't left with mystery meat navigation. (Is that just for show or is that clickable? You don't know until you try.) Removing the bolding might make it less distracting. The underlining for a link is somewhat standard and understandable.

A slightly newer standard is the "link blue" text where the underlining appears when you hover, as Wikipedia uses.

I actually prefer blue text with underlining (and no bolding) as being most understood, and containing the least amount of Mystery Meat Navigation. I spend a lot of time learning the domain of where I work, like cancer genetics currently, so having the GUI be 100% unambiguous helps a lot.

But any one of the three works reasonably well.

I like a bit more margin on the left side, and on the right I have a lot of white-space on my resolution.
Perhaps the right-side column can have more width, along with increasing the Main (left) column width (but only slightly, as I do not like extremely wide columns of text on screen). In additition I think the news feed could be shorter (as in less items listed), so long as there is a link for going directly to the news feed itself.
And as an FYI, the news feed page should follow the same margin decisions that you make on the main page.

Another small idea, I would like to see if the Header of the main page (or all such pages actually) can remain displayed while the rest of the contents of the page remain scrollable. I like having links in place no matter where I am while reading through contents of a web-page.

I agree with removing the line. The tag-line does not need to be so bold as to look like literally part of the product itself.

Of course, just ideas to mull over. Never offended when such are not necessarily included or considered.

artikid wrote:Personally I dislike underlined links inside blocks of text, I think they make the page look messy.

Tod13 wrote:As a software developer and both a GUI user and designer, I like the underlined links. It lets people know those are useful links and the user isn't left with mystery meat navigation. (Is that just for show or is that clickable? You don't know until you try.) Removing the bolding might make it less distracting. The underlining for a link is somewhat standard and understandable.

I considered pretty carefully before choosing to go with black, bold, underlined links. I might back down on the boldface, but I feel like the underlines are important for the reasons Tod points out. Note that the links do go red when you float over them, helping to call out the fact that the links are active.

artikid wrote:I think it would be better to remove underlining from paragraph titles or from links inside text.

This was more a stylistic choice, and I personally like them that way. If you feel they are unclear, I might consider changing them, but if it's just a matter of taste I'd need to see a larger sample of people who don't like them before I'll consider changing.

artikid wrote:If underlining is being removed from links I'd make links a deep, dark red and leave highlight color the bright red it is now.

I'll admit, this is an attractive option.

Tod13 wrote:A slightly newer standard is the "link blue" text where the underlining appears when you hover, as Wikipedia uses.

When it comes to style choices, I like to avoid the word "standard." It's like when my wife talks about the difference between Style and Fashion... Fashion comes and goes, but Style is forever. I don't update the look and feel of the site often; when you are trying to channel a historical era, sticking to the "fashionable" styling of the era is important. It's why the site isn't more graphics-heavy than it is. Using brightly-colored buttons for the "buy" and "download" links was calculated also... they are intended to grab your attention away from the rest of the page the first time you see them.

Tod13 wrote:I actually prefer blue text with underlining (and no bolding) as being most understood, and containing the least amount of Mystery Meat Navigation. I spend a lot of time learning the domain of where I work, like cancer genetics currently, so having the GUI be 100% unambiguous helps a lot.

This, I understand.

One of the cool things about this project is that I get the input of artists, writers, game developers, and a truly random array of other career types. Thanks for all the assistance so far, guys!

NOW I need to spend a little time comparing my "What is..." text to Tod's suggested alternate and work out a version that works for me. As I said, the emphasis on originality in Tod's revised text may be a bit too strong. I'll post whatever I work out here for further comment.

Tod13 wrote:One note on that. The overflow/float settings are such that the main text and the news column have a maximum width they will use. A lot of monitors nowadays (and pretty much all new ones) are widescreen monitors. I'm using a wide screen monitor now, and even without maximizing the window, the main text and news column only take 2/3rds of the screen. As a side effect, it does set off the download buttons and version number very strongly.

The problem here is that, if I set these parameters too generously, I'll get lines of text that are too long for comfort. There's a reason the Core Rules are set in two-column format... it's long been understood that shorter lines (to a limit, of course) are easier to read. Less right-to-left eye movement, and no requirement to move your head back and forth (on a big enough monitor, this does happen) is just more comfortable for most people.

This makes setting up a layout on the web complicated (to say the least).

Other than the forum, no other page on the site gets as much attention as the home page, so making it readable is a core concern for me.

Solomoriah wrote:

artikid wrote:I think it would be better to remove underlining from paragraph titles or from links inside text.

This was more a stylistic choice, and I personally like them that way. If you feel they are unclear, I might consider changing them, but if it's just a matter of taste I'd need to see a larger sample of people who don't like them before I'll consider changing.

Re-reading artikid's comment, I'll come down on the side of the "or" in the original quotation. That is, either the links should be underlined or the paragraph titles should be underlined, but not both. That makes you think the paragraph titles are links, when they are not. Maybe an all-caps font option for paragraph titles?

Solomoriah wrote:

Tod13 wrote:A slightly newer standard is the "link blue" text where the underlining appears when you hover, as Wikipedia uses.

When it comes to style choices, I like to avoid the word "standard." It's like when my wife talks about the difference between Style and Fashion... Fashion comes and goes, but Style is forever.

When I use "standard" I (try) to mean "an unambiguous user interface convention understood by most users". I try not to comment on style, since I know my style choices are not necessarily those of others. I try to keep my comments strictly on usability and coherence.

I actually really like the site style--I tend towards the simple, classic styles.

Solomoriah wrote: NOW I need to spend a little time comparing my "What is..." text to Tod's suggested alternate and work out a version that works for me. As I said, the emphasis on originality in Tod's revised text may be a bit too strong. I'll post whatever I work out here for further comment.

Please remember I ripped of some/a lot of that text from the post that I gave.

re: modified margins.

OK, that works for me.
Though you might nudge the logo up top an equivalent amount, and the first link (Home) as well... just for a clean line down the left side.

Newest update to center the body of text and the news column looks sharp. It is still very readable, but doesn't feel smashed into the side of the page.