Site redesign - 2016 Update #1

[bloodsplatBOOM]

I'm probably one of the very few people who actually like the current layout, so I only truly want one thing: the ability to revert back to this old layout just in case I inexplicably hate the new one.

[llihP]

In response to post #34723145. #34723880, #34726020, #34726205, #34726395, #34729495, #34730205, #34730905, #34732815, #34735345, #34735525, #34736795, #34737030, #34737250 are all replies on the same post.

kraag wrote: Look like M$ Windows 10 buttons and general "square" layout.

Funny how many many large/corporate websites have gone this way so soon after W10 was released. Almost like they got payed to do it by M$.

I have no idea why you'd want your website to replicate the look of that Spyware M$ OS.

splinter82 wrote: Wow. Conspiracy theorist much>?

kraag wrote: Wow - stick your head in the sand much?

opusGlass wrote: Funny how companies follow the current trends?

kraag wrote: Funny how corporations CREATE current trends.

llihP wrote: Masonry layouts were 'square' and image based well before Windows 10 (or 8, originally) had come out. The most recognisable one from back before W8 was released (2011-2012) would probably have been Pinterest.

http://www.webappers.com/2011/12/29/15-great-examples-of-websites-using-jquery-masonry/

Microsoft popularised the concept because they screwed it up so royally for desktop PCs, plus their implementation was poor as a lot of tiles weren't given any context and a lot of it seemed arbitrary.

If you also consider that many of the design elements that currently exist on this site, like thumbnails, mod result lists etc are already image based, you'll see that the primary difference is a shift of where the content sits - it's mostly over the top of the thumbnail now, alongside data that wasn't previously exposed and required an extra click/page load to see.

Considering how vocal I was about how bad I thought the Windows 8 UI/UX was for desktop PCs all those years ago, I couldn't be any more opposed to making it like W8/8.1/10.

kraag wrote: Glad I'm not the only one, I will wait and see how it turns out though before passing final judgement. As they say the new site layout is still in its infancy. But, like FO4, I fear this is the way they are going, regardless.

Sad to see that whatever the corporations say is "trending" is ultimately what everyone has to abide by - rather than designing your own unique site and standing out from the crowd, essentially, thinking for yourself.

NerevarineKhajiit wrote: Square and sleek has been 'in' with designs in general for some time now, and has nothing to do with Win10.

And don't blame Microsoft for the telemetry; not only are the pretty late to the data-gathering party (Cell companies, Google, etc. have been at it for years now), but I can guarantee the main reason it's there is because of the U.S. gov't asking them for it. Just look at the current drama about Apple and the iOS backdoor. Just look at the NSA phonelogging last year.

The only one sticking their 'head in the sand' here is you for subscribing to the idea that somehow every trend in visual tastes is dictated by anything other than user feedback and artistic style. You think those 'large/corporate websites' can just drop an entire brand redesign in less than 6 months? You think somehow Microsoft is willing to drop that kind of money on something that most people wouldn't even notice? I guarantee most of the recent trends you've been noticing have been in the works a lot longer than Win10 has been out.

Not to mention the fact that Nexus layout and preview windows have already been square/rectangular for years, because, surprise, your screen is that same shape. Why waste time designing rounded edges on something when your Image designer tool is already squared, and so is the device your content will be seen on? It's crisp, it's quick, and it's simple.

kraag wrote: Thanks for your opinion NK - but here you ASSUME that I "...subscribe to the idea that somehow every trend in visual tastes is dictated by anything other than user feedback and artistic style...".

Nowhere did I say that 'EVERY' trend is dictated by corporations - you saying otherwise is twisting my words in an attempt to discredit me.

I'm quite sure there are about 4 or 5 websites left on the internet that are free of any type of corporate influence or greed.

WanderingMania wrote: You do know there are ways to "kill" the spyware on win 10 while retaining win 10's functionality, right?

Trendal wrote: Nexusmods was bribed by Microsoft to have square buttons.

EnaiSiaion wrote:

Sad to see that whatever the corporations say is "trending" is ultimately what everyone has to abide by - rather than designing your own unique site and standing out from the crowd, essentially, thinking for yourself.

Windows 10 is a failure, it's still at 11%. Compare to OSX updates.

You do know there are ways to "kill" the spyware on win 10 while retaining win 10's functionality, right?

Nope. Turn off the services, disable the scheduled tasks, it still isn't enough.

I can guarantee the main reason it's there is because of the U.S. gov't asking them for it.

Exactly. And as a foreigner, the US government is perfectly within their rights to spy on me. So I will protect myself.

At least Win7 has a known EOL date (early 2020) so the world has time to figure out whether to move to mobile platforms, Linux/SteamOS, or OSX while Microsoft withers and dies.

kraag wrote: http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/11/02/microsoft-confirms-unstoppable-windows-10-tracking/


That is correct, it is unstoppable, probably hardcoded spyware.


Getting off topic though.

kraag wrote: @Trendal - You posted: "Nexusmods was bribed by Microsoft to have square buttons."

Do you have evidence of this happening or is this just conjecture?

My original post touched on the fact that I thought the new site design looked exceedingly similar to the new M$ Windows 10 color scheme and general layout with soft, solid pastel colors - much like many many other large corporate websites on the internet are now doing.

You're going to have to point out these similarities to Windows 10, because I'm not seeing it. The new blue is only slightly different to the current blue you see here (on the 'reply' button, for example). The greys are exactly the same in places, and are only slightly changed in others. The site is still fixed width, unlike the modern trend of going full width, as the background image remains in place. The buttons are no longer rounded because nothing else (thumbnails etc) are rounded either, now they're consistent.

If you're suggesting that the removal of a simple border-radius on a few elements is somehow pandering to Microsoft, that's pretty laughable. Things are bigger now, more obvious, visible, image based, and they fit within a responsive grid. That's not pandering to anybody, it's a design to help users better interact with the site.

It has already been pointed out that Microsoft in no way pioneered the trend you're alluding to, and regardless, their implementation has always been poor. I'd suggest looking at why these sort of designs are common on responsive sites as well as making some proper comparisons. Edited February 19, 2016 by llihP

[hishutup]

In response to post #34721635. #34724495 is also a reply to 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.

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]

In response to post #34721635. #34724495, #34739595 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.

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. Edited February 19, 2016 by llihP

[sinems]

thank you very much

[Exoclyps]

In response to post #34736435.

urielz wrote: Looks good! I really hope the revamp goes beyond looks and feel. One massive feature missing is the ability to be able to keep up with who replies to our posts. Something like Reddit has in place would be very useful.

Yes, that's a huge thing. Having to keep track of all the places where I made a post just to see if there is a reply is a pain.

[Exoclyps]

In response to post #34736140.

EnaiSiaion wrote: So instead of mods of the week, we are putting most endorsed mods of all time (or 30 days, which is the same thing) front and center?

Ok, unless your newly released mod can beat Immersive Armors, it's stillborn. GG.

Yeah, I wonder how that trending one is acting. Since all mods in the 2nd picture are mods I already know about it'd be of little use to me. I kinda like how it currently is on that front.

[Exoclyps]

In response to post #34710005. #34726575, #34729035 are all replies on the same post.

DreamingGirl wrote: I only have one plea: PLEASE! don't give us infinite scrolls, give us pages and paginator! Infinite scrolls makes it a real pain to find things again later..

So far it looks ok tho

BlindJudge wrote: Oh no! Really!?!?! You don't like infinite scroll :(

.
.
.
.
.

You'll be incredibly pleased to know that there is no infinite scroll and we have no plans to implement it :D

DreamingGirl wrote: Lol that is good to hear :D

I was just concerned from the pictures that says 'load 10 more' or 'load 15 more' as that is usually a sign of endless scrolling to get anywhere. So you are saying there will actually be pages, and not 'load 10 more' ad nauseum on page one?

Yeah, page 1... 2.... 3... and so one could be better. But I'm probably gonna be able to live with booth.

[Olivir2019]

In response to post #34710005. #34726575, #34729035, #34740430 are all replies on the same post.

DreamingGirl wrote: I only have one plea: PLEASE! don't give us infinite scrolls, give us pages and paginator! Infinite scrolls makes it a real pain to find things again later..

So far it looks ok tho

BlindJudge wrote: Oh no! Really!?!?! You don't like infinite scroll :(

.
.
.
.
.

You'll be incredibly pleased to know that there is no infinite scroll and we have no plans to implement it :D

DreamingGirl wrote: Lol that is good to hear :D

I was just concerned from the pictures that says 'load 10 more' or 'load 15 more' as that is usually a sign of endless scrolling to get anywhere. So you are saying there will actually be pages, and not 'load 10 more' ad nauseum on page one?

Exoclyps wrote: Yeah, page 1... 2.... 3... and so one could be better. But I'm probably gonna be able to live with booth.

There are webpages that have both - page numbers, yet also the possibility to load more... actually it loads the next page on the same page...ehm.:-)

[JimboUK]

In response to post #34714565. #34718485, #34720180, #34724595, #34724720, #34725835, #34730065, #34730915, #34731110, #34731435, #34735740, #34736680 are all replies on the same post.

Rooker75 wrote: I'm sure someone's brought this up already, but I'll say it anyway, this site isn't the friendliest to mobile devices as it is now. Text is too small, some important menu buttons rely on a mouse hover event that's impossible for a touch screen and the search box at some point stopped accepting the "enter" button as input (also a problem on desktop browser), so it makes it extra awkward searching from a tablet/phone.

Also, I despise white text against black backgrounds and wish I could choose a more usable color theme, like I can on the forum part of the site. More than a few minutes gives me serious eye strain. I can override the colors on my PC's browser but it makes everything look weird. I can't do that at all on my tablet.

epoling wrote: Am I just old? I don't get reading this site on a phone. You only get a few lines of text that is too tiny for these old eyes to read. By the time you crowd all the necessary functions of Nexus onto a mobile screen you get even less text unless you make it tinier. Just because things can be done on mobile devices doesn't really make it a good idea.

Pagafyr wrote: No! You're not getting old. You are getting worn out, likely following the incorrect guidelines for your continued health and wellness. The tiny mobile phone screens tend to strain the eyes a person who is beginning to suffer from lack of solar or HappyLight during the Winter months when the days are shorter. Get a couple HappyLights in you rooms and you'll see the difference after following the instructions CAREFULLY for them.

llihP wrote: As the new design stands, it's very mobile/tablet friendly.

jim_uk wrote: Does anyone know what those menu buttons at the top do? if clicking them brings down a menu then that's fine, if clicking them takes you off somewhere then it's going to have to same problem as the site does now.

llihP wrote: They bring down menus, yes

jpsimonetti wrote: Regarding Epoling's post.

I have no idea why you'd want to look at this site on a mobile. Are you going to download the addon to your Mod Manager on your mobile? Can your mod browsing not wait until you get home? Seems like a huge waste of resources to expect a site like this to cater to that demand. I'd like to see stats on what devices most of their traffic comes from.

I realize things change, but I hate to see it happen sometimes. This site, for example, is a classic web site design. It is sleek, incredibly fast and responsive, and easy to find what you're looking for without pictures and shiny objects everywhere.

What you kids probably don't notice (because you grew up with it), is the very slight delay in highlighting when you mouse over all those fancy new tiles people keep making sites with. When you mouse over text or a raw html img insert, it highlights instantly. (as you'd see on a classic website, like this). For a generation that is so easily distracted, you'd think they would notice.

That's not a big deal if you're used to it. But there are lots and lots of these "not a big deals" on modern websites. Kids will never really understand how fast and responsive a web site can be, because they rarely see them. They think it means bandwidth/load time when people say a web page is fast and responsive. It doesn't. Or didn't used to, anyway. Now things are ridiculously cluttered with raw text in HTML replaced by a script or image at every possible place.

Anyway, things change. Whatever. Just ranting.

llihP wrote: "I have no idea why you'd want to look at this site on a mobile."

Think of everything you can do on the site, then take away the ability to download mods or install NMM.

NerevarineKhajiit wrote: jpsimonetti I agree with you. I can't see why one would want to browse mods on mobile when you can't actually do anything with them on your mobile (unless somehow the Nexus starts supporting mobile App mods?).

I can see wanting to reply to a conversation thread on a mod, but you can do that through forums, or honestly, just pinch-and-zoom to the comments section. I've even done it myself, and it works great.

That being said, I'm all for a better website if it means they can expand functionality. I'd prefer they give us options, perhaps even a skin system or something that can restore the look of the current site if you get nostalgic, but I see no problems in looking to make improvements.

Rooker75 wrote: I want to use a mobile device because I have nearly 50 mods published on this site and want to check them for comments, questions and bug reports while I'm playing the games I've modded. I use several hundred mods for several games supported here and want to look at their mod pages or comments if I'm having a problem or can't find whatever the mod added. I use the forums and want to read them without closing a game or whatever else it is I'm doing on my PC.

These things are difficult to do with a mobile device with the current design, mainly because of the menus that need a mouse to hover over them.

And I am not a kid. I am 40 years old and have, among other things, designed and operated several websites myself. Nothing done for the sake of being more usable on mobile will effect what it looks like on a PC browser because that sort of thing is handled by style sheets.

TrophiHunter wrote: I use this site on my phone to check my mods and stuff, the site take ages to load atm, so this new beast might be the answer to my modding prayers :)

EnaiSiaion wrote:

The tiny mobile phone screens

?

@jpsimonetti Phones are commonly used for browsing these days and people come here for more than just downloading mods. If I just want to read the forums, catch up on comments, browse the imageshare etc then it's far quicker and easier to pick up the phone or tablet than it is to turn the desktop on.

@epoling Maybe you need to update your phone, pick a phablet sized one and you'll see more than a few lines of text.