Site redesign - 2016 Update #1

[Matoyak]

The part I'm most curious about is the Top Files and the Search sections. I spend far more time on them than the main page, or any one game's home page.

 

Overall, I'm liking the feel of the look of the new design. My main thing is speed of navigation between various parts of the site, and speed of serving the pages to us. As it stands Nexus is a tad sluggish, both in serving/loading the pages and in getting where you want to go. (And I know it's not my internet speed. Average download is 14MBps [MB not mb], Up is 1.5 MBps). The mockups look like they'll be better about the latter at any rate.

[llihP]

In response to post #34721635. #34724495, #34739595, #34739755, #34746780, #34755530, #34757050, #34758760, #34770470, #34772730 are all replies on the same post.

hishutup wrote: I think there is the problem with the whitespace on the sides of the page. Most users are using the standard widescreen displays and the sides usually go to waste, why not display more info like a wider list of pictures.

With ulta wides starting to come into play they will suffer from this issue even more.

llihP wrote: The sides of the page have been left open like that for a few reasons, one of those is a requirement for ads that need to run in a side skin format.

Since the site is build in a modular way, it's easy to build upon it later on for even wider screens if the need arises.

hishutup wrote: I pay so I don't want blank space for ads, I rather have the space properly used for a better experience.
For people that have ads, just reduce the width of the modules.

llihP wrote: Here's one of the other 'few' reasons, I was talking about this the other night. Let me quote myself:

"...scanning left to right with a width of 1400px is a bit much when reading. It's why you'll never find a newspaper with text spanning across each page for the full width..."

And that was said after having designed a page with such a large width.

If there's no limit in place, you're effectively leaving articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser, and I wouldn't exactly call looking from one end of my 27" monitor to the other the greatest experience, especially for reading. My neck would definitely be getting a swivel-like workout.

If you look at Steam stats you'll also see that the vast majority of gamers are on 1080p or below.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Then there's the cost effectiveness, how much you'd benefit from such a design, how such a design would work across all the templates, how practical it'd be and so on. At the end of the day it's not up to me, but there's more to consider than just the fact that ads will make use of this space that would otherwise be empty anyway. As I previously mentioned, at least it's easier to build upon now.

TheThirdRace wrote: "...scanning left to right with a width of 1400px is a bit much when reading. It's why you'll never find a newspaper with text spanning across each page for the full width..."

Sorry, but that's rubbish. Newspapers are designed in sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc, but taken as a whole they do span across the entire page.

People aren't asking for 1 block to span the whole screen, they're asking for putting more sections/blocks in a given screen.

The Nexus is designed the same way as newspaper are, it is divisible by sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc., it just doesn't span across all the available space for whatever reason.

I'm all for more space between sections, making the site breath and whatnot, but I do have a problem when all that space is used to compress the information in a tight and tiny block on the screen because it displays better on mobile...

For example, with the current layout I have 2/3 of my screen unused. All the information is tightly compressed in the remaining 33% of my screen. If you can't see how it's wasted space I guess you will never understand...

PaladinCarnage wrote: I agree with this,using a 1080p monitor and the empty spaces are such a waste,i'd rather see some content on the sides instead of a background image.

kraag wrote: Maybe admin should implement a mobile-friendly site alongside the desktop version? Would solve both problems.

llihP wrote: "Sorry, but that's rubbish. Newspapers are designed in sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc, but taken as a whole they do span across the entire page."

Correct. And this would mean every iteration of the site beneath this super wide version would need to contain these blocks and sub-blocks, and since you can only currently see the homepage, you couldn't possibly have any idea how much this would affect other pages and how they've been divided up.

How many good examples of sites can you find that have Nexus-like content that span the full width of the browser and work nicely across a multitude of templates, responsively? With content divided up like a newspaper? There's a reason you won't find many, if any.

There are are many implications beneath the surface of what you are suggesting, but it's not very practical when it comes to dealing with real world content. The content varies greatly, it's nowhere near as simple as you make it sound.

STURMKATTEN wrote: I don't mind if it's grey. As long as it's not painful white!

AikenHasAHat wrote: llihP--

If there's no limit in place, you're effectively leaving articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser, and I wouldn't exactly call looking from one end of my 27" monitor to the other the greatest experience, especially for reading. My neck would definitely be getting a swivel-like workout.

That's an extremely weak argument. You're going to _force_ a column width, at your end, with no knowledge of what our end displays it with, rather than allow us to size and zoom our browser intelligently on our own screen?

Really, I can't even fathom why you would think it is a _bad_ thing to leave "articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser". That's _exactly_ what you should do. Why do you think windows have size controls? Why do you think monitors can be landscape _or_ portrait? As it is, you just sound like a control freak.

Hostility already, nice :)

"with no knowledge of what our end displays it with"

Apart from the usage data provided by the Nexus and google analytics.

Before the project progressed to design, there was well over 100hrs of time spent studying and discussing the current site and making wireframes for the new one, which included discussion around max-widths. You can probably imagine how hard it is to have a serious conversation with those who glance at 1 layout (1 of over 30 layouts), with no other knowledge, and assume they know how it can all fit within an unlimited width browser window that needs to handle 7 different screen configurations. Each.

In relation to what you're asking for, I'll request this again:

How many good examples of sites can you find that have Nexus-like content that span the full width of the browser and work nicely across a multitude of templates, responsively? With content divided up like a newspaper? There's a reason you won't find many, if any.

At this point, since it seems like I'm repeating myself (^^^literally), I'll leave you with some sensible design advice to consider. You should also consider why other popular sites with millions of users cap their widths at one point or another, and why bootstrap (and the other most used frameworks) have capped layouts when it's quite easy to uncap them and go 100% width. Readability, usability, common sense.

http://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/14928/why-do-websites-not-use-entire-width-of-browser

http://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/3618/ideal-column-width-for-paragraphs-online

http://blog.teamtreehouse.com/which-page-layout

http://webdesign.tutsplus.com/articles/life-beyond-960px-designing-for-large-screens--webdesign-7348

"The empty areas of a screen lend focus to areas of content and help direct the user's eye. Don't eagerly fill whitespace just because you can."

Feel free to provide anything to the contrary that cite relevant examples that could apply to the Nexus.
Edited February 20, 2016 by llihP

[cabanaboy]

In response to post #34721635. #34724495, #34739595, #34739755, #34746780, #34755530, #34757050, #34758760, #34770470, #34772730, #34777950 are all replies on the same post.

hishutup wrote: I think there is the problem with the whitespace on the sides of the page. Most users are using the standard widescreen displays and the sides usually go to waste, why not display more info like a wider list of pictures.

With ulta wides starting to come into play they will suffer from this issue even more.

llihP wrote: The sides of the page have been left open like that for a few reasons, one of those is a requirement for ads that need to run in a side skin format.

Since the site is build in a modular way, it's easy to build upon it later on for even wider screens if the need arises.

hishutup wrote: I pay so I don't want blank space for ads, I rather have the space properly used for a better experience.
For people that have ads, just reduce the width of the modules.

llihP wrote: Here's one of the other 'few' reasons, I was talking about this the other night. Let me quote myself:

"...scanning left to right with a width of 1400px is a bit much when reading. It's why you'll never find a newspaper with text spanning across each page for the full width..."

And that was said after having designed a page with such a large width.

If there's no limit in place, you're effectively leaving articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser, and I wouldn't exactly call looking from one end of my 27" monitor to the other the greatest experience, especially for reading. My neck would definitely be getting a swivel-like workout.

If you look at Steam stats you'll also see that the vast majority of gamers are on 1080p or below.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Then there's the cost effectiveness, how much you'd benefit from such a design, how such a design would work across all the templates, how practical it'd be and so on. At the end of the day it's not up to me, but there's more to consider than just the fact that ads will make use of this space that would otherwise be empty anyway. As I previously mentioned, at least it's easier to build upon now.

TheThirdRace wrote: "...scanning left to right with a width of 1400px is a bit much when reading. It's why you'll never find a newspaper with text spanning across each page for the full width..."

Sorry, but that's rubbish. Newspapers are designed in sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc, but taken as a whole they do span across the entire page.

People aren't asking for 1 block to span the whole screen, they're asking for putting more sections/blocks in a given screen.

The Nexus is designed the same way as newspaper are, it is divisible by sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc., it just doesn't span across all the available space for whatever reason.

I'm all for more space between sections, making the site breath and whatnot, but I do have a problem when all that space is used to compress the information in a tight and tiny block on the screen because it displays better on mobile...

For example, with the current layout I have 2/3 of my screen unused. All the information is tightly compressed in the remaining 33% of my screen. If you can't see how it's wasted space I guess you will never understand...

PaladinCarnage wrote: I agree with this,using a 1080p monitor and the empty spaces are such a waste,i'd rather see some content on the sides instead of a background image.

kraag wrote: Maybe admin should implement a mobile-friendly site alongside the desktop version? Would solve both problems.

llihP wrote: "Sorry, but that's rubbish. Newspapers are designed in sections and subsections, blocks and sub-blocks, etc, but taken as a whole they do span across the entire page."

Correct. And this would mean every iteration of the site beneath this super wide version would need to contain these blocks and sub-blocks, and since you can only currently see the homepage, you couldn't possibly have any idea how much this would affect other pages and how they've been divided up.

How many good examples of sites can you find that have Nexus-like content that span the full width of the browser and work nicely across a multitude of templates, responsively? With content divided up like a newspaper? There's a reason you won't find many, if any.

There are are many implications beneath the surface of what you are suggesting, but it's not very practical when it comes to dealing with real world content. The content varies greatly, it's nowhere near as simple as you make it sound.

STURMKATTEN wrote: I don't mind if it's grey. As long as it's not painful white!

AikenHasAHat wrote: llihP--

If there's no limit in place, you're effectively leaving articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser, and I wouldn't exactly call looking from one end of my 27" monitor to the other the greatest experience, especially for reading. My neck would definitely be getting a swivel-like workout.

That's an extremely weak argument. You're going to _force_ a column width, at your end, with no knowledge of what our end displays it with, rather than allow us to size and zoom our browser intelligently on our own screen?

Really, I can't even fathom why you would think it is a _bad_ thing to leave "articles, result pages etc to the width of the browser". That's _exactly_ what you should do. Why do you think windows have size controls? Why do you think monitors can be landscape _or_ portrait? As it is, you just sound like a control freak.

llihP wrote: Hostility already, nice :)

"with no knowledge of what our end displays it with"

Apart from the usage data provided by the Nexus and google analytics.

Before the project progressed to design, there was well over 100hrs of time spent studying and discussing the current site and making wireframes for the new one, which included discussion around max-widths. You can probably imagine how hard it is to have a serious conversation with those who glance at 1 layout (1 of over 30 layouts), with no other knowledge, and assume they know how it can all fit within an unlimited width browser window that needs to handle 7 different screen configurations. Each.

In relation to what you're asking for, I'll request this again:

How many good examples of sites can you find that have Nexus-like content that span the full width of the browser and work nicely across a multitude of templates, responsively? With content divided up like a newspaper? There's a reason you won't find many, if any.

At this point, since it seems like I'm repeating myself (^^^literally), I'll leave you with some sensible design advice to consider. You should also consider why other popular sites with millions of users cap their widths at one point or another, and why bootstrap (and the other most used frameworks) have capped layouts when it's quite easy to uncap them and go 100% width. Readability, usability, common sense.

http://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/14928/why-do-websites-not-use-entire-width-of-browser

http://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/3618/ideal-column-width-for-paragraphs-online

http://blog.teamtreehouse.com/which-page-layout

http://webdesign.tutsplus.com/articles/life-beyond-960px-designing-for-large-screens--webdesign-7348

"The empty areas of a screen lend focus to areas of content and help direct the user's eye. Don't eagerly fill whitespace just because you can."

Feel free to provide anything to the contrary that cite relevant examples that could apply to the Nexus.

A simple solution for those who want widescreen viewing: On Windows OS in ANY browser (as far as I know and I have 5 browsers that I use) hold the Control key and tap the + and/or - keys until you reach the desired size. To resize to default simply hold Control key and tap the '0' on the top of the keyboard..

[falconfetus8]

Nix the comic sans.

[Ellen63]

I like the "design mock" shown above (assuming it works like I think it might).

 

At the end of the day, I just want to find that "new mod" or other information I might like/need (out of thousands of choices) -- as fast as possible. So, I need pages that start "fat with information" that I can easily scan with my eyes. Subsequently, the design should allow my "clicks" to logically "drill down" from "broad overviews of what's on the site" to "particular mods/information". Of course, that's what you are trying to provide. So far, so good.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Ellen63

[WightMage]

Promising so far...

[Creos_X]

I'm sorry, but I absolutely DO NOT like the block view so I hope you're also implementing the flat view, too into the new design.

[xunknownx777]

I love how it's coming along. I hope to see a section for tracked mods, that would be really neat.

[BlueGunk]

Looking good! Thanks for the work going into this - good luck! I think a quality search facility will be so important: Boolean, wild card, fields, etc.

[liljohn88]

I can already tell you're coming up with look and better usability for the site, it's exciting to watch. One thing i'm sure you've heard requested is a better search engine. It's so rare to get what I want through the existing search engine on the site, that I don't even try anymore, I go to google or bing to be directed back to your site to get what I want. It may be that it's cost prohibitive or there are other factors i'm unaware of. I can live with google, yet it's so tempting to try your search and get frustrated again. My OCD maybe, It would also help if I could spell better i'm sure, and yet... Whether you can improve the search engine or not, i'm still going to love you guys for the care and energy you all put into having this magnificent tool available to us. You guy's simply ROCK! Thanx!