"You can do amazing things in gameguru, and it in no way diminishes what it can do because this game in unreal or this game in unity did more or less." - wizard

"It's the dissonance between alright graphics but poor functionality that generates the frustration." - Avenging Eagle

I place those two separate quotes there because Avenging Eagle identifies the area where GG needs the most work to succeed. To be exact, the most common complaint about GG isn't WHAT is does, but HOW it does it, yet the defense of GG is consistently "it can do it, if you know how".

GG doesn't suffer from lack of features or lack of graphics. It suffers from lack of intuitive design. The devs need to focus on UI/UX, and the community needs to LISTEN to the arguments being presented by users who are frustrated with an otherwise promising game creation program.

So on that note, I implore those here that are proficient with the software to submit UI/UX feedback through whatever channel the devs most commonly watch for suggestions to GG.

Umm, UX?

I can see this thread quickly becoming another flame war, so I want to quickly take this opportunity to thank Loktofeit; I do feel the UI/UX of Game Guru needs substantial work, but my point with that quote was more around how the graphics of Game Guru (Classic), lacklustre though they are, are still the most advanced bit of the software compared to what you can actually make with it gameplay-wise. UI is definitely a huge part of that, just think about every little lua tweak that needs to be done in Notepad++ instead of in the actual engine.

However, problem 1: GG Classic is semi-abandonware at this point, receiving quarterly bug fixes but no substantial improvements. It's about a year away from being bolt-gunned in the back of the head if you ask me, so UI updates are unlikely.

Problem 2: A substantial amount of time has already been spent (in my opinion, misspent) on UI design for Max. The naysayers will say that Max's UI is so much better and clearer than Classic's and that this thread is unnecessary because it's a non-issue now. It's 100% not a non-issue, and it hasn't gone away.

I'm of the opinion you write your software first, then stand back and look at how you organise the information in the most intuitive way. TGC has done it differently, they've decided a set of rules and conventions for what they think the final software might include and are designing bits gradually. I'm not saying either is better, I'm just saying that there's two schools of thought on it.

Historically, TGC has always lacked someone with true UI/UX skillset in their team. That may have changed for Max, I'm not familiar with the exact make-up of the team, but judging by Max's current look, I would say it hasn't. And to clarify, graphic designers are not UI designers either; UI is about so much more than designing nice icons, it's about the hierarchy of information, the psychology of the user. In all honesty, it's a bit of a dark art, but I'm with you that Max could totally benefit from someone with those skills. I'm sorry to say this but right now it looks like a sixth-former's coursework than a professional and engaging bit of software.

AE

@AmenMoses

UX = User Experience.

It's about creating an intuitive, meaningful, and useful manner for the user to interact with the app.

For example, 3DGameMaker had a good user experience. If a user clicked each icon in order across the top of the app, they would effectively configure every option they need to make a complete game. The icons were also intuitive - you could very easily tell what each option was.

Another example was DBPro's properties panel where all the configurations for your app itself - resolution, title, filename, icon, version, etc - were in one spot.

These are examples that take into consideration the interests and needs of the user and improve their experience managing them.

@ Amen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_experience

UI+UX = UCD LOL

PD: adding some related Link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-centered_design

Hello
To me max looks alright , I see no point on spending four years or more just to try and get a pretty interface that everyone agrees on. And yes it could take that long just to get a user interface that every one likes. I say let lee and the team finish what they got or else Game Guru Max will never be finished you cant please everybody. Every body has great ideas but not every one has forever to build a game I just wish people would let the team get done what they think is good and then you either buy it or don't.

Ahh, UE, why didn't you say so.

No one is talking about making it prettier. Functionality and usability are the topic here. 3com posted a great link explaining it.

Well imo what I've seen so far doesn't improve on Classic much, in fact in a lot of ways Classic is more usable for me.

Totally agree with AE.
In my opinion
We need
An actual working engine with the world environment completed first. It must have the Terrain smooth and easy to use and none buggy

All Ai with actions. intelligent characters, the navigation system needs a major overhaul off terrain as well as on it.

Physics to be fully working in water as well

Functional commands - triggers lua scripts of large amounts

Efx - particles, water working with physics and swimming and underwater efx. Weather, night and day, grasses, fog, lights. Shadows actually working.

And it needs to be Streamlined and fast and optimised to the max. With no bugs or memory leaks.

This i feel needs to be done first
Not the lazy designer extras

Then add the secondary stuff

Title and loading screens design etc
Importing fbx x etc
Character creation
Ebe
Ui design with lazy designers extras and color buttons and a lot of extremely useful and none used extras
I still use the widget much better than whats new.

My point is there is a lot of none first priority stuff being prioritised from my view. And history tells me taking time is a double edge sword in tgc world.

People say take your time with max.

HELLO.........
9 years its taken to get game guru classic to a point where it and all the features are half baked and no where near what we expected and abandoned . People have been let down however you try and sugar coat it.,
With max there is a glimmer of hope to get it right and finish it. Not rush but at least have deadlines for releases within actual time frame that are achievable its not hard to do.

Anyway
So given the history of classic and 9 years of production to get it to near abandoned are you happy for more of the same? Really?

If we are to talk about UI and GGC, I'd say having a bit more dynamic FPE settings in the editor objects properties would be nice. Similar to how in FPSC you could change quite a lot more than what you can here in GGC.

Also the ability to assign textures in editor would be really helpful. As seen here:


It would also be great if we had the ability to change particle properties in editor as well. As seen here:


Basically something similar to dynamic Lua but instead pointing to FPE fields we could change, like how we can "stretch" and "name" currently.

I however do not think GGC will be getting major updates like this, as all the focus for feature inclusions are going towards the new GGM product which makes more sense.

And you are incorrect UI programing and design relies on the actual rendering engine and general engine features and associated "switches". What is meant by this the wicked engine is a completed engine, it is physically done, while it is heavily modified to work in the gameguru environment and associated UI, the actual rendering isn't physically being worked on.What is being worked on is the expanding of output of the rendering engine gives for the interaction with the UI

What is being worked on is the interaction of the UI with the engine, in others words the UI commands has to be physically coded and added to the engine, in others words you can't have the UI command scale object in real time without having the engine physically action it. It wouldn't know what to do with the command as the default engine doesn't have scale object command as an example.Wicked engine of course has the command scale object command. But it is a good bet it was expanded on for use with the gameguru UI.

You don't complete the entire rendering engine and then design UI for it, the UI and the associated rendering part is coded in conjunction with one another as you have to have the specific code in the engine it self to action the UI command.

Max is unique in that it already has a completed rendering engine with physics and every thing else needed, however the engine is in default mode and as such needs to be told what the UI wants the engine to do. But general best practice is developing UI and engine in partnership with a certain level of the engine output has been achieved and that is generally when you can run around in the engine.

Classic has a pretty "clean" and easy to use UI, it isn't overly complicated and allows for new users to start with their game design right off the bat. Now you could attribute this to bad UI designer(s) , but it is far from it, the UI is designed with young users in mind and has the specific task of not overwhelming users. UI design while overly simplified is done intentionally.

People seem to constantly forget WHO the target audience considering the classic has the ability to turn of blood and gore and hide age restricted content.

Now lets look at the various UI's that is out there. Now tell me which UI would be the easiest for the 10 year old to work with considering that IS who the target audience is. You are welcome to ask TGC who their target audience is and they will give you the EXACT same answer.
UI design is intentional and not due to bad design.

The unreal node based UI design is already overly complex for a 10 year old. No?


Too much customization can also be wildly overwhelming.



Cryegine probably has "cleanest" UI of the lot so far but still overwhelming to a 10 year old


Easiest UI so far but it is mostly a default engine that requires a lot of user action and a fair bit of code.


Again a 10 year old will be entirely overwhelmed with interaction with this UI


Lots of settings and tweaks it is sure to annoy users especially 10 year olds.



Now lets look at a product UI from TGC not geared towards kids ? Way different and it better matches the functionality of the others doesn't it.


Does TGC have bad UI designers ? The simple answer is no, with AGK studio they are more then able to design a UI for mature audiences.
So yes gameguru and max is designed with children in mind and not as a result of bad UI design.This isn't a personal attack, nor a flame war just stating the facts people seem to forget sometimes.Implementation of game idea, assets and what could be done better in regards to general game design theory is an entire post on it's own.


But I found it prudent to point out some preconceived notions about the UI to be incorrect. UI and the rendering engine has a symbiotic relationship, whatever action you command in the UI also needs to be true in the engine for that action to be true.Do you think it is easier to code the entire engine and then design the UI and having to go back and modified the engine code for the UI commands, or developing UI commands and engine actions in conjunction.

Either method would probably work, you would probably have more bugs and stability issues doing the UI afterwards and would be far less efficient then doing the work in conjunction with one another. As I said with max the situation is unique as it already has a working engine, and have to resort to the second method of doing things with regards to the UI.With the wicked engine being vastly superior to classic it has significantly more features tweak-able by the UI but the ultimate goal of the UI is to be usable by a 10 year.

Unfortunately it isn't what most here would like to hear but the reality of the matter we will need to lower our UI expectations as TGC goals aren't necessarily your own.Now obviously there could be a comprise and have the more advance UI features disabled by default and have best of both worlds, for the novice and experienced users alike. TGC has started doing that with max to what level this will go remains to be seen.

If you asking whether classic can have the same treatment, the answer would be no, gameguru engine is an entirely different beast, engine/ui relationship is a lot more primitive and would require a LOT of work to get certain functionality likely to the point of having to rewrite a fair part of the engine it self to accommodate.There is a lot more to it then simply adding UI features and bobs your uncle.

Oh yeah, why?

The community has next to no input into what happens to the engine. That was similar with GG's development as for a long time where valid, well thought out and realistic notions this community had (and believe me, everything that you might think of being wrong with GG or needing an improvement has been discussed in long winded threads like this. I promise.) where never implemented. In fact we had a good while where feature requests where voted on by the community. This was a fascinating isolated study on the main issue with a democratic system. Mainly that a majority voted for non-essential, fluff features while the older, more experienced users voted for substantial, core elements. Now one can hope that this will be different with max but its up to the devs to decide how they will steer it. We the community can just talk about it.



Correct. GG had a couple core issues from the get go that could not be fixed retroactively. This being memory management and the lighting engine. While these things have been polished as good as it possibly could. (if you wheren't around for the early days: Stability, performance and functions are drastically better now than they where for the longest time of GG's life span but a lot of things are left bare bones or implemented in a very rough way.

In the end, GG is a software that has its flaws but can do great things if the user is aware of them and knows how to work around or with them.



That might be true but a lot could be improved regarding the advanced features. As it stands, making custom media for Game Guru is very different and often more difficult or at least more illusive than it is in other engines. Improving upon this would be beneficial for max. For example: I can make custom head gear for GG's character creator. However, there is no documentation or intuitive way for a new user to do so. The same goes for character .fpe commands that can only be set manually (which weapon they hold for examples) and not in the UI. Again, simple things that would greatly improve the user experience but so far have not been considered or implemented.



-Wolf

Lol when I point this out, my head gets chomped off, oh well. As I mentioned general game theory and design and industry practice is an entire post in it self. Some thing I would like to do one day but it is an insanely broad subject matter with various integral steps like your lighting tutorial and that just scratches the surface, we not even talking about, actual game design best practices with regards to level flow, structural depth, symmetry and asymmetry just a lot, considering many an author has written subject matter and most just scratching the surface or briefly discussing the subject matter it is definitely some thing the community could use.

Well you need to consider TGC's perspective on the matter. They rarely have the advance/experienced user in mind it has been pointed out to them before and they just kinda shrugged it off. I don't blame them as they have a specific goal and target in mind. I bet unity and unreal is exactly the same with regards to user input on the overall development is going to be minor as well. As well as any other software. User knows best right ?

They aren't always inline with the product vision or realistic achievable requests.Documentation is has always been lackluster and TGC should really be tapped on the fingers repeatedly for that.

However it is still important that users are aware of the specific goals they have in mind and willingly to accept that these are the goals they have in mind irrespective of user input.

Well, there are general topics that I like to point out whenever applicable. Basic stuff like the need to actually have a vision and some semblance of coherent art asset use /direction but as you said its a broad topic and there is no one way of doing it. It also branches out and is generally true regardless of engine. Most of my tutorials focus on game guru and how to do certain things that aren't immediately obvious to a new user. How he goes about implementing that is up to him. So good luck if you want to pen such a tutorial but I am certainly not going to tackle it. I'm not necessarily qualified to do so either.



At this point, yes. However there was a time earlier on where some things could have been tackled differently and we might have had a "well rounded" software instead of what can arguably be described as patch work. I'm fine with what game guru is now, I think its quite decent and far better than I expected, yet saying this will not convince the plethora of users that expected "easy unity".



True! I'll write a few more basic tutorials later this year just so new users can get more out of GG and understand how its asset pipeline works. I think that once you explain the basics to someone dedicated, they'll figure out the rest eventually.

As for the rest of this topic... again, we had similar threads earlier during GG's development and they where mostly just time sinks and I doubt that it will be different with max. All we can do is see where TGC takes it and if we see some value in it, use it and learn its systems.

- wizard

Your examples, save for the AGK one, were all way out of GGs class, so they are rather irrelevant. So let's touch on that quote above:

Whether it is "designed with children in mind" or not, that doesn't change the fact that it is BAD design. If you create a story in GG Classic, where do you put the text string? Can you really reply with "in the audio field" and still not concede there is some serious bad design to the UI/UX of GG?

Teabone presented some examples of good user experience design of FPS Creator. You presented AGK Studio, which also has some great user experience improvements from AGK2, like the media folder and the in-editor help/examples panel.

To use Teabone's example, as it is a great 1-to-1 example, good design and a good user experience would be to make an object's properties readily available to edit. 3DGameMaker and FPSCreator, both TGC products, had that capacity. It is convenient for the user. GGMax buries these options, making it harder for adults, let alone children, to find and use them.


I don't think anyone is asking for a dumbed down experience or design at the level of Unity or Unreal blueprints. Again, GameGuru (Classic or Max) isn't facing a graphics or feature problem (WHAT it has), it's a user experience problem (HOW its used).

Oh, I absolutely agree with you, I just know that threads like this are not prone to be taken into consideration. There is a lot that could be done, really simple things that would be brilliant. Like a simple interface to allow users to make text based multiple choice dialogues. RPG maker has that, why not here? Well... hasn't happened yet so people resort to scripting.

What are you bleating on about Wicked Engine for? It has no relevance to the discussion about UI. It goes without saying that when you're building a game engine, you have to program buttons to do stuff in said game engine and have that outputting via the renderer, you do this as you go. I'm simply saying that you can spend weeks debating what shade of teal a menu should be or how big a text box is and it has zero difference to the capabilities of the game engine itself.

Whilst Max is still being developed and the end product still somewhat hazy, I'd have preferred basic buttons and a cluttered layout initially if it meant more engine functionality. Then once you've got MVP, TGC could go back and lay everything out properly, with your 10 year-olds-in mind.

Take Blender; 2.7 had oodles of functionality dressed up in a difficult to navigate UI. Then they redid the UI for 2.8 and, whilst it caused a lot of ripples at the time, I think overall most people agreed it was an improvement, especially for beginners. I don't even use Blender and I can do more in 2.9 than I could in 2.7, it's more intuitive. This is the benefit of redesigning once you have the functionalities finished.

Anyway, I won't be drawn into another argument with you, you're welcome to your opinion just as I am welcome to mine.

AE

@Wolf Fair point.

You misunderstood, the other is examples of UI TGC will NEVER implement. Not because it can't because of the project goals and associated targets so it isnt irrelevant but to give you examples of the what the UI will never be additionally the post was to explain what the goals and target audience is.

It is actually to take into consideration what TGC goals are and what the target audience is. This allows you to work and help you understand within the TGCs framework of what they will allow and won't allow with regards to UI.If you are going to discuss the UI you need to keep in mind the learning curve and overall usability and interaction of a 10 year old with the software.

You need to understand that the software is also being used as a educational tool in schools that has partnered with TGC. Most isnt actually aware of that fact, that indeed the software is being used by schools and as such has requirements of its own in that regard.

Now this thread has all been about that UI should improve but no one has actually taken the opportunity to suggest exactly how that should be done or how it should be implemented keeping in mind the target audience. Also keeping in mind that Classic will not ever change until such time the source code is officially released or the project gets retired.It is pointless asking that classic changed in any way that ship sailed a long time ago.

Complaining about it on the forum isnt going to cut it TGC is busy they don't have time to read every thread, if you really think the you can make real change in the UI you should be emailing lee, detailing exactly what you think could be done better giving examples as well as motivating it. That way you will get a sure fire answer and you will know exactly where TGC stands.

But you really need to sit down and ask will a 10 year old find this addition to the UI intuitive enough to be able to use it flawlessly every time ?If you can reasonably answer that you will have either a yes or no.

I know its frustrating that the UI is wired differently compared to other software, but consider why it has been done the way it is. Consider that TGC is adding tool tips and other things like videos to assist.

IDK you can complain and discuss this to death but consider and accept UI focus and goals and suggest with in that framework.

It actually has every thing to do with the wicked engine.

I mentioned the symbiotic relationship it has with the engine even explained UI commands don't just magically happen it needs to be in the engine as well, simple enough to understand is it not. ? But have it your way, have no problem pointing out when you are incorrect again.Either you accept it or you don't. There is really nothing to it none of the other folks here have taken offense not even wolf, so what is the problem.? Welcome to PM if you have things to address and things to get off your chest.

Thanks Have a nice day !

@Loktofeit


Talking just about GGMax, I think TGC is taking the right way about "how to do", I'm going to post some examples about it.







Ok, they are imcompleted yet, but they are in the roadmap.

GGMax has dynamic Lua... which is exceedingly more powerful than any option GGC and FPSC ever provided its users. That is one of the big selling points for me is the ability to have editable variable and string fields in the editor itself and write Lua scripts around that.

If I'm not mistaken we actually have more options than GGC for the actual objects themselves. So with Max this is a step forward in terms of UI and UX. You can even control the emissive glare off objects directly in the engine itself. Additionally most of the TAB TAB option we had in GGC are now integrated directly in the editor and you can see those changes reflected without having to go to "test map".

On the topic of GGC specifically, originally GGC had more object properties visible for things like characters, similar to FPSC, however they were removed to declutter and create a more clean interface for a more novice target audience. They later on adding some more fields into object properties to allow for creating Text Zones and smaller additions like that. Personally I'd like to see more of those FPE fields be turned into dynamic fields in GGC but there is probably a reason why some of them are not visible. For instance the ability to change textures from the editor or shaders. Perhaps the complexity of that involves more core engine changing and thats why its not included. Or if a user happens to type something in those fields GG would crash during test and so it was decided not to have users have access to live editing texture. No sure but we do know GGC is specifically designed the way it looks and acts in editor to target new comers to game design without getting overwhelmed by panels and fields.

@wizard



You keep saying that. Can you link to where it is stated that GGC is designed for 10-year olds? Not that I agree at all that GGC's design is a cohesive, integrated, or intuitive experience for any age group, let alone 10-year olds, but since your main argument against a better user experience is that it supposedly works well for 10-year olds and that is the audience it is designed for, I would like to see the article, page, or post where the devs state that.

It was also rather telling that you didn't answer my question.



@3com

Thanks for the info and screenshots. Looks like a significant improvement!

It isn't. As far as I can tell, there is no immediate target demographic for GG, its a lot more muddled than that.



You've been incorrect a lot of times before. Things like insisting that modern AAA titles use 4k textures for something as small as cigarette packs which happened exactly 0 times in the history of big budget game development. You see, you have been belligerent towards veteran users on here often enough. Usually you have somewhat of a hint of a point in what you say so its fine by me but if you keep your tone up I will see myself forced to remove you from this community.

If you are really looking for better UI/UX, GameGuru Max really is the solution you'd be looking for:

Latest Broadcast:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGfNUJbdj1A