New Nexus Mods design launched

[MioneRCP]

In response to post #55089158.

protoculturejunkie wrote:

I personally will be clutching onto the old design until the moment it dies because I really am not a fan of this new one. And it's not about me clinging onto the old one because I hate changes or something, I welcome changes when I think they're an improvement, but this is honestly not an improvement in my eyes. It's simply the fact that the compact look of the old design was traded for this plain ugly "modern" design which involves big images and fonts, too much scrolling down, too much eye-movement along with information being scattered all over the place. What's up with all the depressing colors of dark gray, light gray and occasionally white ? Did someone run out of color when designing this place ? Is the "modern" design too afraid of colors ? Am I in 50 Shades Of Gray ?

And then there's other things, some of which I mentioned in the forum post.

My honest opinion is that this is a downgrade rather than an upgrade, because of reasons I stated in the forum post. Such a shame that this is now turning into Bethesda.net 2.0 design... only more uglier and effort requiring.

If anything should have been changed, then it was the forums section because it felt so disconnected from the main site in terms of designs and bringing it up to the Nexus design would have been amazing.

I will remain on the old design until hopefully some changes are made to the new design that make it at least somewhat visually pleasing and convenient.

I said it once and I'll say it again. Old design was compact, displayed important information when required, was easier to navigate and much more viewable.

The new design is too big, too flashy with images and fonts. Absolutely no colors. Information is scattered all over the place. A lot of scrolling and looking around. The biggest sin of all however is that it forces the user to SEARCH for IMPORTANT information, instead of handing the important information to them. Just look at the mod pages for example and see the first 5 lines when you open a mod page.

This new design would be a great design for a phone, not a PC.

Just my opinion.

 

I find myself agreeing with Crimsomrider. The new site is a step backwards.

I liked the 'advanced search' option better on the old site, also there appears to be a massive delay when typing on this site for some reason.

[IvanIlyich]

I like this design over the old for a couple reasons. I am perhaps too far from my monitor, and slightly myopic, so the larger text increases visibility greatly. The placement of some of the buttons seems more intuitive. This is coming from someone who has been away from modding and therefore this website for half a year, so I was not so attached to the old design.

[islandoftoys]

Visually it's a step up but that's not really important. I find it much harder to navigate on the mod pages than I do with the old design. Its elements, where it counts, are too large. The old one was compact and navigation was quick. The new one is wasting so much screenspace, you would need to look at it on a 21:9 display. Maybe that's the idea.

 

This +1. Way too much scrolling needed. It reminds me of when I need to help someone with their computer and they've set their dpi scaling way too high for my liking...

[yanuage]

on my desktop computer, the new designe site take 75% of my screen width, when the older take only 50%...

 

maybe the next version could be displayed on a full screen ?

 

I liked the 'advanced search' option better on the old site, also there appears to be a massive delay when typing on this site for some reason.

 

 

me too, the old design was more compact and more quick.

 

 

 

to talk about positive points :

when I'm on my phone, it's really, really better, everything seems to work !

thanks for that.

[slippyguy]

In response to post #54957703. #54958568, #55053523 are all replies on the same post.

ri2do wrote: new site design is terrible, completely counter intuitive.
It took me 20 minutes to find my tracked mods, and than I had to filter them by game even though i was already in FO4 selection.

This is not a progress but a stepback

Ethreon wrote: Took you 20 minutes to find the tracking center which is accessible immediately as you load the website from a drop down menu similar to the one from the old layout? Took you 20 minutes to find this?? http://prntscr.com/h64mdu
And the other statement is equally bs. They are already arranged by game if you have any selected.

ri2do wrote: what can i say. Im used to old design.
Also, i did not not know there are drop downs, and if oyu do not know the "tracking center" is at the bottom of the page, not on your site profile anymore.

Another this isif you do n ot have a filter selected it show all games, previously it already filter to the forums game, so my comments stands.

Not everyone has to enjoy the redesign, clearly you do but I dont

PS: not like my or anyone else complains matter, they will go with it anyway no matter how many against voices there will be

All of the dropdowns in the header have a downwards pointing arrow denoting that they are in fact dropdowns, just like the old layout. Not to mention, the dropdowns appear immediately when simply mousing over them, not requiring a click. You didn't notice this in the twenty minute you spent trying to find the tracking centre? Edited November 10, 2017 by slippyguy

[mrspongeworthy]

OK, so my 2cents worth: The new site "looks" fine from a purely aesthetic point of view (although, as others have pointed out, it seems to take way more space and require way more scrolling), but the designer(s) have fallen into the current trendy UI trap of "low contrast" and "flat" design. Unfortunately, as "nice" as the new site may look, in terms of being visually appealing (that's pretty much subjective anyway), flat and low-contrast designs do make UIs harder to use. Many of us in the IT industry have been complaining about this new design paradigm since it boomed in popularity around 5 or 6 years ago, saying that it's harder to see, harder to use, and slower than UIs that have depth and contrast. This has finally been born out in a study: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ and https://slashdot.org/story/17/09/05/1750238/its-official-users-navigate-flat-ui-designs-22-percent-slower?sbsrc=md . And while that's a relatively small study, I think anyone that works with everyday computer end-users every single day (like I do) will tell you that these designs are, indeed, quite detrimental to productivity. (Use a Mac running SL for example, then try using one running HS - the degradation in usability is stark.)

 

So what should you do with the new design? 1) Make sure that all buttons look like buttons, and that all links are obviously links. 2) add some depth back to the design and 3) add some contrast back into the design - everything doesn't need to be subtle changes. Finally, take an objective look at the old design and the new design side-by-side and then go looking for every feature/section of the site. Is there anywhere at all where navigating the new design takes more steps to get from "page x" to "page y"? If so then that's a flaw in the new design that should be corrected (i.e. don't make it more time-consuming, or more difficult, to get from point a to point b).

 

Please take this as constructive criticism, which is what it is meant to be. Your new design is certainly no way near as bad as some other sites I've seen, you've (thankfully) gone only half-way towards the flat-UI paradigm, but there is no doubt that backing away from the flat/low-contrast design will make your new site easier to use. (Remember, designers, *you* designed it - so you know where everything is and how it works. Everyone else in the world has to figure it out.)

Edited November 11, 2017 by Mr_SpongeWorthy

[Mebantiza]

OK, so m 2cents worth: The new site "looks" fine from a purely aesthetic point of view (although, as others have pointed out, it seems to take way more space and require way more scrolling), but the designer(s) have fallen into the current trendy UI trap of "low contrast" and "flat" design. Unfortunately, as "nice" as the new site may look, in terms of being visually appealing (that's pretty much subjective anyway), flat and low-contrast designs do make UIs harder to use. Many of us in the IT industry have been complaining about this new design paradigm since it boomed in popularity around 5 or 6 years ago, saying that it's harder to see, harder to use, and slower than UIs that have depth and contrast. This has finally been born out in a study: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ and https://slashdot.org/story/17/09/05/1750238/its-official-users-navigate-flat-ui-designs-22-percent-slower?sbsrc=md . And while that's a relatively small study, I think anyone that works with everyday computer end-users every single day (like I do) will tell you that these designs are, indeed, quite detrimental to productivity. (Use a Mac running SL for example, then try using one running HS - the degradation in usability is stark.)

 

So what should you do with the new design? 1) Make sure that all buttons look like buttons, and that all links are obviously links. 2) add some depth back to the design and 3) add some contrast back into the design - everything doesn't need to be subtle changes. Finally, take an objective look at the old design and the new design side-by-side and then go looking for every feature/section of the site. Is there anywhere at all where navigating the new design takes more steps to get from "page x" to "page y"? If so then that's a flaw in the new design that should be corrected (i.e. don't make it more time-consuming, or more difficult, to get from point a to point b).

 

Please take this as constructive criticism, which is what it is meant to be. Your new design is certainly no way near as bad as some other sites I've seen, you've (thankfully) gone only half-way towards the flat-UI paradigm, but there is no doubt that backing away from the flat/low-contrast design will make your new site easier to use. (Remember, designers, *you* designed it - so you know where everything is and how it works. Everyone else in the world has to figure it out.)

 

The points you raise are lucid, coherent, and backed up by facts and logic. As such, they will be completely dismissed by TPTB, and possibly flamed by at least one the (luks guud dudez, lubbing it) robo accounts with 20-30 posts.

 

I cant stand working on my mods with this fugly, no-contrast and barely functional interface, and ihis has nothing whatsoever to do with 'not liking change'. Ill try to get as much done as I can before darkness descends, since I will be far less inclined to add or improve existing content if forced to use the 'new' and definitely not-improved offering.

 

However. they have sunk lots of money and time to get this sub-par result, and as such, they started circling the wagons right from the start. People of course, being what they are, are loathe to admit failure, or write-off mal-investments. Even to the point of ignoring and refusing to address even the most mild of critiques. They only thing they will respond to, are technical glitches with the design itself, but ignore, or occasionally dismiss critics of the design itself. Obviously, no form of 'market testing' was done prior, or if there was, the sample group consisted solely of insiders that already decided the design was the greatest thing they had ever seen.

 

Far too much scrolling, too many tiles, oversized images of the two 'trending' mods, which means get ready to be assaulted by endless click-bait loli-follower of the day pics right in your face. And for what? Not for the core content that everyone is actually here for.

[InMyBestInterest]

I like the old design better because I m used to it and its easy to navigate plus more info per page. I will get used to the new design just like I did with the original when I first started using this site as I have no other choice. Edited November 10, 2017 by InMyBestInterest

[Deleted133263User]

 

OK, so m 2cents worth: The new site "looks" fine from a purely aesthetic point of view (although, as others have pointed out, it seems to take way more space and require way more scrolling), but the designer(s) have fallen into the current trendy UI trap of "low contrast" and "flat" design. Unfortunately, as "nice" as the new site may look, in terms of being visually appealing (that's pretty much subjective anyway), flat and low-contrast designs do make UIs harder to use. Many of us in the IT industry have been complaining about this new design paradigm since it boomed in popularity around 5 or 6 years ago, saying that it's harder to see, harder to use, and slower than UIs that have depth and contrast. This has finally been born out in a study: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ and https://slashdot.org/story/17/09/05/1750238/its-official-users-navigate-flat-ui-designs-22-percent-slower?sbsrc=md . And while that's a relatively small study, I think anyone that works with everyday computer end-users every single day (like I do) will tell you that these designs are, indeed, quite detrimental to productivity. (Use a Mac running SL for example, then try using one running HS - the degradation in usability is stark.)

 

So what should you do with the new design? 1) Make sure that all buttons look like buttons, and that all links are obviously links. 2) add some depth back to the design and 3) add some contrast back into the design - everything doesn't need to be subtle changes. Finally, take an objective look at the old design and the new design side-by-side and then go looking for every feature/section of the site. Is there anywhere at all where navigating the new design takes more steps to get from "page x" to "page y"? If so then that's a flaw in the new design that should be corrected (i.e. don't make it more time-consuming, or more difficult, to get from point a to point b).

 

Please take this as constructive criticism, which is what it is meant to be. Your new design is certainly no way near as bad as some other sites I've seen, you've (thankfully) gone only half-way towards the flat-UI paradigm, but there is no doubt that backing away from the flat/low-contrast design will make your new site easier to use. (Remember, designers, *you* designed it - so you know where everything is and how it works. Everyone else in the world has to figure it out.)

 

The points you raise are lucid, coherent, and backed up by facts and logic. As such, they will be completely dismissed by TPTB, and possibly flamed by at least one the (luks guud dudez, lubbing it) robo accounts with 20-30 posts.

 

I cant stand working on my mods with this fugly, no-contrast and barely functional interface, and ihis has nothing whatsoever to do with 'not liking change'. Ill try to get as much done as I can before darkness descends, since I will be far less inclined to add or improve existing content if forced to use the 'new' and definitely not-improved offering.

 

However. they have sunk lots of money and time to get this sub-par result, and as such, they started circling the wagons right from the start. People of course, being what they are, are loathe to admit failure, or write-off mal-investments. Even to the point of ignoring and refusing to address even the most mild of critiques. They only thing they will respond to, are technical glitches with the design itself, but ignore, or occasionally dismiss critics of the design itself. Obviously, no form of 'market testing' was done prior, or if there was, the sample group consisted solely of insiders that already decided the design was the greatest thing they had ever seen.

 

Far too much scrolling, too many tiles, oversized images of the two 'trending' mods, which means get ready to be assaulted by endless click-bait loli-follower of the day pics right in your face. And for what? Not for the core content that everyone is actually here for.

 

 

+1 for both of these posts, I have contributed a fair few bug reports on github now, but my overall personal opinion of the site redesign remains pretty much all that has been said in these two quotes.

 

@Dark0ne - You cant really put all that in a bug report on github.

[Ethreon]

In response to post #55136828.

alt3rn1ty wrote:

 

OK, so m 2cents worth: The new site "looks" fine from a purely aesthetic point of view (although, as others have pointed out, it seems to take way more space and require way more scrolling), but the designer(s) have fallen into the current trendy UI trap of "low contrast" and "flat" design. Unfortunately, as "nice" as the new site may look, in terms of being visually appealing (that's pretty much subjective anyway), flat and low-contrast designs do make UIs harder to use. Many of us in the IT industry have been complaining about this new design paradigm since it boomed in popularity around 5 or 6 years ago, saying that it's harder to see, harder to use, and slower than UIs that have depth and contrast. This has finally been born out in a study: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ and https://slashdot.org/story/17/09/05/1750238/its-official-users-navigate-flat-ui-designs-22-percent-slower?sbsrc=md . And while that's a relatively small study, I think anyone that works with everyday computer end-users every single day (like I do) will tell you that these designs are, indeed, quite detrimental to productivity. (Use a Mac running SL for example, then try using one running HS - the degradation in usability is stark.)

So what should you do with the new design? 1) Make sure that all buttons look like buttons, and that all links are obviously links. 2) add some depth back to the design and 3) add some contrast back into the design - everything doesn't need to be subtle changes. Finally, take an objective look at the old design and the new design side-by-side and then go looking for every feature/section of the site. Is there anywhere at all where navigating the new design takes more steps to get from "page x" to "page y"? If so then that's a flaw in the new design that should be corrected (i.e. don't make it more time-consuming, or more difficult, to get from point a to point b).

Please take this as constructive criticism, which is what it is meant to be. Your new design is certainly no way near as bad as some other sites I've seen, you've (thankfully) gone only half-way towards the flat-UI paradigm, but there is no doubt that backing away from the flat/low-contrast design will make your new site easier to use. (Remember, designers, *you* designed it - so you know where everything is and how it works. Everyone else in the world has to figure it out.)

 

The points you raise are lucid, coherent, and backed up by facts and logic. As such, they will be completely dismissed by TPTB, and possibly flamed by at least one the (luks guud dudez, lubbing it) robo accounts with 20-30 posts.

 

I cant stand working on my mods with this fugly, no-contrast and barely functional interface, and ihis has nothing whatsoever to do with 'not liking change'. Ill try to get as much done as I can before darkness descends, since I will be far less inclined to add or improve existing content if forced to use the 'new' and definitely not-improved offering.

 

However. they have sunk lots of money and time to get this sub-par result, and as such, they started circling the wagons right from the start. People of course, being what they are, are loathe to admit failure, or write-off mal-investments. Even to the point of ignoring and refusing to address even the most mild of critiques. They only thing they will respond to, are technical glitches with the design itself, but ignore, or occasionally dismiss critics of the design itself. Obviously, no form of 'market testing' was done prior, or if there was, the sample group consisted solely of insiders that already decided the design was the greatest thing they had ever seen.

 

Far too much scrolling, too many tiles, oversized images of the two 'trending' mods, which means get ready to be assaulted by endless click-bait loli-follower of the day pics right in your face. And for what? Not for the core content that everyone is actually here for.

 

 

+1 for both of these posts, I have contributed a fair few bug reports on github now, but my overall personal opinion of the site redesign remains pretty much all that has been said in these two quotes.

 

@Dark0ne - You cant really put all that in a bug report on github.

The first post is quite good, I like the design and I tend to agree with those points. However, placing the second one just ruins it. The other guy is trying to pass his opinion as a fact and acts as if disagreeing with him means you are wrong. The design is not a complete failure, that's utter bollocks.