Hmm. It is more interesting, for sure. But it's also much wider and not as...smooth as the last one. Wider isn't necessarily bad, but not everyone has a widescreen computer. Or is it just the fact that I do have one make it seem a little weird?
My first reaction was that it doesn't look good on a wide screen, too cluttered.
But on a second look it might not be so bad, and my first reaction was just me being used to the old clean look.
It's so ugly. I thought I'd gone to the wrong site. Upon realizing I didn't, my first reaction was OH GOD THE UGLY. Perhaps this was exaggerated because I'd only been awake for like a minute. But still >.> If you could somehow line up the item lines, it'd probably look better :/
So, some of you love it, some of you hate it, some are weirded out because it's different. Sounds pretty typical of any change.
I had two main goals with the update:
1) Let the page expand/flex to fit different browser sizes, instead of being a fixed width.
2) Work in some actual game art.
3) Get rid of the borders on the tables that nobody else has used since 1997.
I'm pretty sure those three things have been accomplished. Maybe not exactly elegantly, but close enough.
@awaj: Rounded corners? Do you have any idea how difficult those are?
@jazztap: obviously not going to constrain the width, because that's counter to one of my goals. I'm sticking with the principle that every user can set their browser however they like, but if I fix the width then I'm forcing a lot of people to be stuck with a width they don't want.
@ magi: I can't do a series of random images as a background image in a table. I have to do a background to let it scale with changing page sizes. At least, that's how I understand it; someone may know tricks that I don't. There might be other ways to fudge it, and I can give it some thought.
Carygon Nijax wrote:I thught my browser was broken too.. because I never saw the little images of the items.. and.. what the hell is that green thing??
I could be wrong, but I think it's in the slots, too. Ryme's just teasing us with it.
I'd have to agree. My desktop monitor is 22 inches, so maximized it makes it a pain to read. And it's an inconvenience to place upon us large monitors to have to re-size every time we switch over to the TH main page >.> But granted, since it's just one page, it can be lived with.
Therum wrote:
-The picture of the CD is cut off on my resolution, and that looks reeeaaaalllllyyyy goofy. You need to make sure the last image in a row doesn't get cut off like that. Likewise, the left and top edges of the gasmask cut off naturally - I would use images that fit within the frame instead.
It scales. That's the whole point. I can't design for 100 different screens, and the choice is either not scale at all (and thus be too big or too small) or scale and thus risk being cut off. There's nothing magical about your monitor that I should use it as a guide -- hundreds of others see hundreds of different things.
Honestly? It's a page I look at for 10 seconds. It's different, but it's not bad. It's certainly not something that would drive away potential players.
The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"
The point we're making Cris is that it is bad for monitors which are too small or too large, where the original page was just fine for even my large monitor. Also, Ryme, you certainly could design it for 100 or 1000 or /all/ screens... You've got the power of JS and PHP, afterall, which is /made/ for dynamic programming of web pages >.>