Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
 Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 13:19 |
 
|
Taking this over from this thread where it got lost in the shuffle.
| WhatBall wrote: | | Double-size (or scalable) client: The single biggest complaint I hear from friends and other new players coming to FUMBBL is the size of the icons and client. It is also the number one reason given by people playing Cyanide as to why they stick with a bug-riddled game versus coming here. If we had a client option with 60x60 (or larger) squares (versus 30x30) it would help immensely. The icons could look so much better too. |
First off I can understand this request perfectly well, Christer himself has asked for that repeatedly.
The reason why it hasn't happened yet is twofold:
1) I don't own that much "screen real estate" myself. The whole FFB development has taken place on a laptop, first with 1024x768 resolution, the last two years on 1440x900. So for me personally it's looking just fine and I simply don't have a way to develop and test it otherwise.
2) The client contains at this point over 2000 (two thousand) icons that would need to be adapted to a larger size. Player icons going 60x60, Fields increasing from 782x452 to twice that number, new player portraits, new sidebars, new scorebar etc. Even better but even more work would be to do all this in scalable vector based graphics. But this is THOUSANDS of hours of work. WhatBall has done an awesome job over the last 2 years all in his free time (thanks, buddy!), but that is certainly more than he can handle.
Ah, and before that comes up: Christer has experimented with a little piece of software that does an astonishingly good job of scaling player icons up. The results are tolerable, yes, but not great. And this is no solution for fields and client graphics and does not solve point 1) above, either. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 13:23 |
|
I also work on a lap top, so I'm unaware of the scale problems from a first hand perspective as well.
I think first point of call should be the Java bowl large icon pack. Sort through them and see what are any good/any good temporarily. There are also some large icons in the javabowl custom section. Some beautiful 2nd edition dwarfs for instance. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
To give you an idea of what the client looks like on my screen, here's a screenshot of it:
https://fumbbl.com/Screen.png
It's 2560x1440 at 27", which means 109 DPI, or roughly 43 pixels per cm. With a square being 30x30 pixels, this means 0.7x0.7cm or so. Now, put that roughly 60 cm away, and the squares are very small for me 
When I play, I use the OS X full-screen zoom feature which ends up being fuzzy to say the least (it's a traditional bicubic zoom), but at least I don't have to move my head closer to the screen.
For me, personally, I would be happy being stuck with abstract icons for scaled views to begin with, and my tool could be used as an interim solution for a double-sized icon set. Boards and side-panels would have to be redrawn of course.
Portraits could stay the size they are IMO, they don't need to be scaled up. I'm sure the portrait panel could be reworked somewhat to make use of the extra space.
Another option would be to stick with side-panels as they are, and only double the pitch. Some small reworking of the side panels would be enough.. Effectively, widening the chat boxes to cover the whole width of the window and pulling the side panels up.
782x452 doubled would be 1564x904, and a good target for a double-size client would be for a 1920x1200 resolution screen which is a fairly common resolution.
To be fair though, a simple bicubic rescale of the whole window would be an improvement for me, since that'd look similar to the way I play now without having to zoom in everything on my screens. |
|
|
Shraaaag
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 15:12 |
|
There are some programs for windows that lets you zoom in and out. Haven't tried any yet (one of them is called qzoom). |
_________________
 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 15:18 |
|
Why not just use the player pics that knut and Ryan did for a larger scale pitch? |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:01 |
|
As good a job as the tool that Christer has done is, I still really hate the blown-up icons. They really don't do it for me and I would not want my work judged on them.
Here is the system that I would propose, and be willing to put the effort into doing.
I would prefer a scalable client where the icons are all SVG based. If we are going to put in the effort, I would only do it if done right. For the icons themselves I would strongly urge we stick to either a single straight on view or a 3/4 view (big guy angle) with square highlighting to show who is moving or taking an action. Perhaps we could go with 2 views in future, but for now I would go 1 view, and here is why.
Getting back to the SVG idea, I would like to build everything in overlaying vector pieces; body, head, shoulder pads, helmet, pants, etc. The idea being there would be a default position for each player type (which I have already thought through) and then you could go into each player and change their equipment. E.g. Human blitzer, change the base skin colour from Caucasian to Black, use a head with a beard, give him the open face helmet with the nasty top spike, and beef up his shoulder pads. Additionally, you would have an overall setting to change the team's primary and secondary colours. Then FUMBBL would send all this info to the client when you start a game and you would have your own custom team and players. I can even think of how we can add mutations this way and +ST by up-scaling models on the field automatically. If you didn't like the other team's colours or equipment choices you would have a 'standard icons for opponent' option where you could set the team colour.
This would be scalable and customizable. In the end, it would be easier for me than doing all the icons as bitmaps as I can easily integrate different components from team to team, but still keeping unique options for each race. This is why doing side views would be hard though because it means a complete second set of everything at a different angle for very little gain, which is why I think a 3/4 type view would work. Think PvZ where each team faces each other all the time, or just straight on TT-style model shots.
Obviously this approach needs a lot of support from both Kalimar and Christer, but imo, it is the best one for the longevity of FUMMBL and the client. |
_________________
 |
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:11 |
|
Not sure I understand what you mean concerning the views.
How do you want to represent the selected player?
And: how do you do an SVG based field? How does that scale?
Consider me a n00b on these topics. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
I'm absolutely for a SVG puppet type system. I could even see a use for having individual parts on the site, allowing people to put together their own icons by picking parts.
I could see an icon creator system where there's a large number of SVG parts, and ability to set primary/secondary colours. You start with picking a set of boots (which are encoded with a "base connector point" and a "leg connector point"). Then you pick legs (again, with two points configured), which are placed behind the boots, connecting points as appropriate. Then the torso, head, left and right shoulder pads, left and right arms..
With some work, we'd end up with a large set of pieces, much like what you're thinking Whatball, except they could be put together dynamically. If we could pull off the basic platform for it, adding a new component would allow for many many variations.
It'd also be possible to give coaches the ability to pick pieces individually for their teams for team unique icons without requiring people to draw a full set of their own in SVG.
I'd happily put in the work that's required on my end, and technical stuff (possibly building an app to add this connection point metadata to the raw SVG parts). It'd be spectacular to have a fully scalable client. |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:21 |
|
For the field, I would suggest using a PNG (or JPG) as we currently do and simply scaling it.
For the views, I would suggest the square behind the player turned a different colour to show they were selected instead of two different views. The other option is a highlight around the selected player. This may be a short-term fix if we could get secondary views done, but that means doubling the work, maybe more because the sides are usually more difficult. |
_________________
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Kalimar wrote: | Not sure I understand what you mean concerning the views.
How do you want to represent the selected player?
And: how do you do an SVG based field? How does that scale?
Consider me a n00b on these topics. |
For the pitch, I'd make a large-scale version of the grass portion and scale down together with an overlay for lines. This overlay could be done with traditional Java2D primtives or simply by using SVG stencils. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Whatball, for selection, it'd be possible to have different "base" svg parts in different colours. Black for unselected, green for the selected player, red for stunned, yellow for stunned players (together with the current cross/line designation). |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:29 |
|
Agree on the dots overlay Christer, but would leave the lines as part of the images as they have more 'character' that way.
Not sure I follow on the second point. Do you mean change the background behind the player based on their state? I like that idea, and it can be done right in the client. |
_________________
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
No, I meant more of drawing proper miniature bases as a base. Kinda like the shadow circles that are at the base of (most of) the current icons. That'd probably look better if we opted for a tilted perspective. |
|
|
Big-Al
Joined: Feb 17, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:32 |
|
I love the ideas being discussed here. I want to say all the hard work everyone has put into this system shows your passion for this game and desire to make this appealing to more and more people. Thanks so much. Your hard work is appreciated!!! |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 31, 2012 - 16:33 |
|
| Christer wrote: | I'm absolutely for a SVG puppet type system. I could even see a use for having individual parts on the site, allowing people to put together their own icons by picking parts.
I could see an icon creator system where there's a large number of SVG parts, and ability to set primary/secondary colours. You start with picking a set of boots (which are encoded with a "base connector point" and a "leg connector point"). Then you pick legs (again, with two points configured), which are placed behind the boots, connecting points as appropriate. Then the torso, head, left and right shoulder pads, left and right arms..
With some work, we'd end up with a large set of pieces, much like what you're thinking Whatball, except they could be put together dynamically. If we could pull off the basic platform for it, adding a new component would allow for many many variations.
It'd also be possible to give coaches the ability to pick pieces individually for their teams for team unique icons without requiring people to draw a full set of their own in SVG.
I'd happily put in the work that's required on my end, and technical stuff (possibly building an app to add this connection point metadata to the raw SVG parts). It'd be spectacular to have a fully scalable client. |
I love this idea. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes FTW! (Replays...
Search
