tormyb
-
Posts
145 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by tormyb
-
-
I'd definitely be interested to see what two-tones lines on the skills section would look like, because just as with tormyb, I do sometimes find my eyes getting lost when peering into that section of the screen.
I wonder how the two-tone lines might look if presented a couple of different ways. The first and most obvious way (which I guess is what everyone has in mind) is to alternate the tones each line. This is perhaps best for focusing the eye and being able to scan across and interpret quickly.
An alternative could be to have blocks of each tone alternating by the skills groups.
For example
Tone 1: all the primary skills.
Tone 2: all the mental skills
Tone 1 again: the performance skills.
and so on.
Chunking the information like this could, potentially, make it easier to find the skill that you are looking for at a glance. I'm certainly not a graphic designer, I don't think I ever even completed a computing or art project at school, I just spilled paint allover myself and tried not to break anything. So certainly don't trust my opinion on anything visual. I do work in educational and cognitive research though, and this chunking is something that often works well for helping dyslexic readers.
More importantly, this:
Kam every release you bring out of this somehow surpasses the former. Absolutely incredible work once again! -
I think there are lots of good points on both sides of the debate. I feel a little bit conflicted as to exactly where I stand. I'm probably in agreement with most of the penalties as they are, but what do I know, the game isn't even released yet.
The following is mainly about match length and overuse penalties.
One one hand, I like that there are certain penalties which are likely to ping lower card matches and differentiate them from the main events which get the time. I'm sure many of us have got real world examples of midcard matches between amazing performers, which were way less entertaining than they could have been due to not getting enough time. There are countless stories of matches (I'm mainly thinking about WWE here) with great potential being too short to make room for lengthy matches elsewhere, and then underwhelming. The match length penalties do represent this.
There do need to be ways for the match grade to represent that Tommy Cornell vs Sean McFly in a main event with all the time they want, is an entirely different beast (not just a few points) to them being crammed in a short match on the midcard. TEW 16's less harsh penalties often didn't quite reflect this as well.
I wonder, however, whether the penalty should apply equally to all match types. It does seem difficult when certain product types require match types which conflict with length expectations. Could, perhaps, short match length penalties be reduced for "Steal the Show" or even for matches with the "All Out" road agent note, or something of that nature?
I also wonder if people feel a little as if they are being punished twice (maybe they should be punished twice?), in certain instances. For example, a less popular worker will already be getting a lower grade due to lower popularity. Then, in some products, they will usually receive an additional penalty for the match being too short or, if the match is long enough to avoid that penalty, for the worker being overused.
Now, there is certainly an argument that less popular workers should be receiving these penalties. I certainly wouldn't advocate being able to smash out sensational ratings for every match on every show, and penalties do create this more realistic variety in match grades.
That being said, to those who do not like the penalties (aside from the +vs- debate), is it partly because you feel that you are being punished twice for the same thing? The first punishment being that the worker will already be getting a lower grade because of their lower popularity. The second punishment being that, with overuse penalties overlapping (or close to) match length penalties, those workers are then being punished for their lack of popularity a second time by overuse penalties - which are a result of lacking popularity.
I'm not entirely sure why I'm getting so into this - given I play with penalties off whenever I feel like it, and don't really care about "getting good" - but I thought I'd put my ideas out there and see if anything resonates. Yeah, well, you know...that's just like...my opinion, man.
Edit: Should have mentioned this before I went off on my ramble. Great original post, really detailed an well thought out.
-
Most likely letter grades aren’t coming back.
So as an alternative, can we have an option for 1-10 number system?
I prefer to play in pro mode with the level of uncertainty. But the numbers aren’t good on my eyes. I would be more comfortable looking at “5 - 8” rather than “53 - 85”
Same for match grades. Scoring a 6 out of 10 looks better to me than a scoring of 64 out of 100
I mostly agree with this. I like having the more detailed double digit numbers available when I want to go into detail in some instances. However, the vast majority of the time I just want to take glance an get a quick impression of a skill.
For example, when I'm on the "Workers" screen, I rarely want to go into every little detail about a worker. I usually want to scroll through lots of workers quickly, while glancing at the headline figures. I then like to click into the full profile of the workers that grab my attention.
With my (not necessarily representative) play style in mind - there is pretty secure research into the relative speeds of cognition when viewing single and double digit numbers (Martin Fischer at Potsdam does great work in this area). The conclusions are, as you might expect, that humans display significantly quicker and more accurate cognition when viewing single digit numbers.
This difference in cognition time - while measured in just a few seconds or less - seems tiny, but really adds up when trying to look over a large number of workers.
To be clear, I wouldn't advocate the complete removal of double digit numbers, and I doubt that would be a feasible request. Rather, I would prefer to see them retained in the detailed "Skills" screen within a workers profile, but to have a less detailed single digit number (or letter) visible on the overview (i.e. what you see of the worker on the "Roster" or "Workers" screens).
I think that there have been a lot of great upgrades to the interface in TEW 2020 and before that in 2016. However, I do think that the trend has been towards putting more on individual screens, sometimes at the cost of readability. This might save clicking time, but the benefits are often lost because of the additional time it takes to interpret what you are seeing on these more detailed screens.
I actually really liked the TEW 2010 "Roster" and "Workers" screens which served as great summaries of the worker you were looking at. They were less detailed but, as such, were more easily absorbable as summaries or overviews (which is what I really want from that first look at a worker).
-
I'm not able to move around where the data is presented sadly, so the best i can do to help this issue is add in two tone lines so its easier to keep track which line of stat youre reading across. I'm gonna add a small version of it for worker screens hopefully in the next update, with a potential to do the rest at a later date.
Thanks for clarifying. Given the limitations, I think that the two tone lines are a solid workaround, and definitely a good touch.
Keep up the great work.
-
Ant-Man is my boy.
Close the thread. It's over now. Someone got the correct answer.
Ant-Man.
Just Ant-Man.
Also, Ant-Man.
-
These look brilliant. Thanks so much!
-
On behalf of Big Smackers everywhere - thank you!
-
This looks absolutely great. I really like the gold borders - they really help me to focus. Maybe I'm just very simple, but before this I was finding it hard to know where to look on TEW 20's new wider display. The borders are really helping to break the screen down into chunks for me.
As someone who doesn't know anything about the possibilities and limitations of creating skins for TEW 20, I had a question about the skills section (central in the most recent screenshot). Is there a way of moving the skill names (e.g. "Brawling") closer to it's associated value? With all the blank space in between them, I find that absorbing the information doesn't come naturally to me. At first glance, I just see two unconnected columns - one of words, one of numbers - rather than being able to quickly interpret a workers skills. Is this a limitation of the game, or is it something that could potentially be incorporated into a skin at some point?
Thanks for the awesome skin!
-
This looks amazing! Such great work. The colour coding of the office screen buttons, in particular, is a great touch. In fact, it would be great if the full release of the game allowed for them the buttons to be grouped accordingly.
-
"push The Smacker!"
"push The Smack-er!!!"
I never expected that I would ever in my life support someone using the phrase, "push The Smacker!"
However,
Push the Smacker! Smack the Pusher! Push the Smacker!
"The Dark Destroyer" Steve Frehley vs Runaway Train
Christian Faith vs "The French Canadian Phenom" Marc DuBois
[six Man Tag Team match]
Captain Atomic and The Anglo American Express vs "Blue Blood" Paul Huntingdon and The Samoan Wildboyz
"Every Woman's Dream" Joe Sexy vs "The Fashion Phenom" Frederique Antonio Garcia
[Tag Team match]
The Amazing Bumfholes vs The Pain Alliance
-
Am I alone in feeling like that would make these games a pain to play? Especially TEW where I like to have music open, as well as a spreadsheet and word processor so I want to be able to have quick access to the task bar and those tabs. When I play on my laptop, TEW does take up the whole screen and I need to keep hitting the windows button to bring up the taskbar and I hate it.
I definitely agree with you Idolized.
I would also add, that I quite like the screen size being more compact. Maybe I'm just used to the smaller TEW 16 window, but if anything I like it being smaller so that my eyes/brain can process the whole screen at once.
-
<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="48213" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The forum needs like buttons. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yep.</p><p> </p><p> I haven't even read any of the more negative comments - but without even knowing what inasamedia posted - I'm almost always going to respect someone more for apologising for something they regret.</p><p> </p><p> Good stuff inasmedia!</p>
-
<p><img alt="Qk6PFw9" data-src="https://ibb.co/Qk6PFw9" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>
Hello – to preface this, I’m very much still getting used to the game (which hasn’t even being fully released yet), and so I’m reluctant to make any sweeping suggestions when I don’t even entirely understand how the game functions yet. I am also not a game designer, a graphic designer, or even someone with particularly good taste in anything.</p><p> </p><p>
However, my work as an educational researcher (particularly regarding dyslexia), does mean that I have a couple of points to make about the section of the UI that I have screenshotted and attached (can be viewed from either the roster or workers screens. I fully understand that my suggestions won’t resonate with everyone, and I’m sure that those working on the game have more pressing things to attend to, but given Adam’s announcement in which the game’s release was delayed for further work, I thought I might as well take the opportunity to give my input.</p><p> </p><p>
I’m sure that making such a text based game dyslexic friendly is incredibly challenging – and am also aware that most people won’t be up to date on the latest developments in the learning theory – however, there are a few small tweaks which could make this section far more accessible to many with dyslexia and similar moderate cognition SEN.</p><p> </p><p>
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>The first thing</strong> is the white on black text. While it can vary from case to case, the current research suggests that light coloured text on a darker background makes reading significantly harder for many with dyslexia. Instead, pastel coloured backgrounds are ideal. I do recognise, however, that there are a lot of these “white on black” sections in the game and replacing them may not be a viable option at this stage. That being said, if those doing all the hard work to make the game could consider this when designing new screens, that would make one fan very happy. Even tweaking the white text to just be very slightly further off-white could go a long way.</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Secondly</strong>, the spacing/distance behind the attribute labels (e.g. “Brawling”) and the values (e.g. “74”) is quite far. This can make cognition much more challenging for dyslexic users – similar to the river effect which occurs when reading justified or badly spaced text. While I am not dyslexic, I actually find that this distance between attribute label and value makes it harder to read and interpret quickly myself. If possible, reducing this spacing could be beneficial for some.</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Thirdly</strong>, I really appreciate the colouring of the attribute values on the right-hand side. This gives a good visual representation, which I personally appreciate, and I would suspect many dyslexic users will too. It would be useful if the left-hand side (the attribute labels – e.g. “Brawler”) utilised colour more too.</p><p> </p><p>
I am not advocating for them each being their own colour, which would look more like a firework display than a game, but perhaps the use of two colours could work well. To clarify, I don’t think that this would work best with two colours alternating every other line:</p><p>
e.g.</p><p>
Colour One</p><p>
Colour Two</p><p>
Colour One</p><p>
Colour Two</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Rather, I would prefer</strong> to see one colour used for the first group of attributes – the primary skills – then the second colour used for the next group – the mental skills – and so on, alternating between the two colours for each group of attributes.</p><p> </p><p>
The benefit of this for dyslexic users would be to break up the “wall of text”. Even (in some cases especially) when not reading the entire wall of text as a single paragraph – and trying to dip in and out – it is beneficial for dyslexic readers to have clear breaks in chunks of text. This is especially important as the lines around the text are the same colour as it – which already makes it harder for people with dyslexia to identify words/letters or to locate things within the text. I also think it would make quickly identifying attributes quicker for some other users.</p><p> </p><p>
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….</p><p> </p><p>
I had a lot more thoughts regarding this topic, but thought I’d leave it there because a) I’m tired, and b) I don’t want to rattle on any further, in case anyone is actually reading my boring and overly wordy thoughts.</p><p> </p><p>
It may well be that my suggestions are unworkable, undesirable, or foolish in a manner I have not yet spotted, however, I hope they help in some small way.</p><p> </p><p>
Thanks very much for taking the time to read this. Thanks even more for taking the time to develop a game which I am sure will bring me a lot of joy in the coming months.</p><p> </p><p>
Tom.</p><p><a class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image" href="<fileStore.core_Attachment>/monthly_2020_04/1406834627_TEW20Suggestion.jpg.0a15cb834213a49e4d4dfb09c1cbb6c3.jpg" data-fileid="4302" data-fileext="jpg" rel=""><img data-fileid="4302" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt="1406834627_TEW20Suggestion.jpg.0a15cb834213a49e4d4dfb09c1cbb6c3.jpg" data-src="<fileStore.core_Attachment>/monthly_2020_04/1406834627_TEW20Suggestion.jpg.0a15cb834213a49e4d4dfb09c1cbb6c3.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></a></p>
-
These are great. Thanks so much!
Looks like stables are becoming a bigger part of my booking. It's lucky I don't have control over any real life wrestling company - for a number of reasons - but mainly because seeing all this fantastic work has made me realise that I would change my plans every time the merchandising department showed me a cool new design.
Thanks again!
-
-
<p>Hello all,</p><p> </p><p>
Just to preface this, I am really looking forward to TEW 2020, and think that each iteration of the series has definitely been moving in the right direction. However, there is one small area which I really miss from TEW 2010 and, before posting a suggestion, wanted to run this by the community (just in case I've missed something, or someone who has been testing can tell me that this is no longer relevant).</p><p> </p><p>
In TEW 2010, when viewing most lists of people (e.g. the character menu, or roster screen), you saw something roughly like this:</p><p> </p><p>
2010 <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/88r8rszxq8w6w64/TEW%202010%20Characters%20Page.jpg?dl=0" rel="external nofollow">https://www.dropbox.com/s/88r8rszxq8w6w64/TEW%202010%20Characters%20Page.jpg?dl=0</a></p><p>
<img alt="TEW%202010%20Characters%20Page.jpg?dl=0" data-src="https://www.dropbox.com/s/88r8rszxq8w6w64/TEW%202010%20Characters%20Page.jpg?dl=0" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>
However, as of 2016, you see this: <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/ku6tdwptdgh812f/TEW%202016%20Workers%20Page.jpg?dl=0" rel="external nofollow">https://www.dropbox.com/s/ku6tdwptdgh812f/TEW%202016%20Workers%20Page.jpg?dl=0</a></p><p> </p><p>
2016</p><p>
<img alt="TEW%202016%20Workers%20Page.jpg?dl=0" data-src="https://www.dropbox.com/s/ku6tdwptdgh812f/TEW%202016%20Workers%20Page.jpg?dl=0" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>
The 2016 screen is better for going into detail, and makes more information immediately available. However, I feel that it lacks visualisation.</p><p> </p><p>
2010 <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/5xcqdb9xlf7dodp/TEW%202010%20Visualisation.png?dl=0" rel="external nofollow">https://www.dropbox.com/s/5xcqdb9xlf7dodp/TEW%202010%20Visualisation.png?dl=0</a></p><p>
<img alt="Dg1jvrT" data-src="https://ibb.co/Dg1jvrT" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>
For me, the use of colour and combining skills into a smaller number of summarised areas (e.g. rumble incorporating three skills, etc.), works much better. Generally, if I am viewing stats from an overview screen, I am likely to prioritise getting a quicker summary over a more in depth look. I used to find it a lot easier to flick through lists of workers, using the colours as visual cues, and then go onto the profiles of those workers that I wanted to find more information about (rather than viewing it from the overview screen).</p><p> </p><p>
Maybe I just have a very colour/visual orientated mind, but even in 2016 with all the information available on the character/worker overview screen, I tend to actually go into workers' profiles when I want a detailed look (due to the more readable layout). However, I miss the ability to get that quickly visualised overview that TEW 2010 offered.</p><p> </p><p>
The 2016 layout, in my opinion, works best when you already know who you are looking for, but want to do a deep dive. The 2010, works much better for scouting broader groups or workers, or quickly getting an overview of the a roster. This makes me think that more hardcore players (I'm probably at the casual end of the spectrum) might prefer the 2016 layout, but 2010 might be better for the less experienced. I wonder if anyone else has an opinion on that, as I'm certainly not that attuned to other players' play styles?</p><p> </p><p>
I appreciate that other changes to the game - fog of war/pro mode, etc. - might impact the 2010 model; but what I'm asking, in an overly convoluted and rambling fashion, is to what extent it is easy to get a quick visualisation of a worker's talents when skimming through a list/roster in 2020?</p><p> </p><p>
Particularly with the new comparison screens, I see less need to be able to access so much information all at once from - for example - a roster screen, and would prefer a return to a quicker, more simple visualisation on such screens. <strong>Has anyone who has seen TEW 2020 (apologies if you are not meant to talk about it), got any comments on the visualisation in the game?</strong></p><p> </p><p>
Even just adding colour to the 2016 style section below would be a great help for me:</p><p>
<a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzczkhflxofrht8/TEW%202016%20Visualisation.png?dl=0" rel="external nofollow">https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzczkhflxofrht8/TEW%202016%20Visualisation.png?dl=0</a></p><p>
<img alt="YL04PzR" data-src="https://ibb.co/YL04PzR" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>
Thanks very much for taking the time to read this, and sorry that I managed to turn a simple question into a lengthy post.</p><p><a class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image" href="<fileStore.core_Attachment>/monthly_2020_04/1618863893_20102016VisualComparison.jpg.aa3a7e482862b575fa7cabc0212f3785.jpg" data-fileid="3570" data-fileext="jpg" rel=""><img data-fileid="3570" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt="1618863893_20102016VisualComparison.jpg.aa3a7e482862b575fa7cabc0212f3785.jpg" data-src="<fileStore.core_Attachment>/monthly_2020_04/1618863893_20102016VisualComparison.jpg.aa3a7e482862b575fa7cabc0212f3785.jpg" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></a></p>
-
<p>I was wondering about attributes that impact the duration - rather than the likelihood or strength - of negative or positive events.</p><p> </p><p>
For example:</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Stubborn</strong> - This worker will retain negative morale effects from booking decisions for longer. They will also be more resistant to conversation/meddling/persuasion attempts.</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Bears a grudge</strong> - This worker will retain negative moral effects from backstage incidents for longer. They will also retain "simmering tension" relationships for longer.</p><p> </p><p>
<strong>Forgive and forget</strong> - Negative morale effects, as well as negative relationships, will fade (more quickly) over time.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>
Apologies if I have missed anything which makes these suggestions superfluous. I have been away from these boards for a while, and so I've had quite a lot of reading to do to catch up on the development of 2020.</p>
-
<p>Hi all,</p><p> </p><p>
Just thought I would drop by to say that I stopped playing TEW a few years ago when the ThunderVerse was a work in progress. Having recently got back into the game I am amazed by all of the work that has gone into it since then. Just goes to show, you pop out for a moment, barely long enough to blink (and then wait for two years), and when you come back everything has changed.</p><p> </p><p>
Anyway, awesome work.</p><p> </p><p>
TB.</p>
PSA: It's OK to get penalised for things in segments!
in Total Extreme Wrestling 2020 General Discussions
Posted
I think this is a really interesting. At the risk of over complicating things, modifying by match style might be interesting. The reason for a high spots match ideally being shorter than some other types of match isn't just that workers run out of stamina quickly - the nature of the match means that it can burn out the crowd quicker. Whereas a more technical slow build match doesn't go longer merely because the wrestlers have the stamina to do so.
In reality, the wrestlers (skills and popularity), the context, the type of match, the card placement, etc. all impact how long a crowd will enjoy a match for, and not simply because these things compensate for their dislike of the length.
..........................................
On a slightly different note, I was just thinking about the balance between receiving penalties for things you realistically would, and TEW's quite volatile popularity.
What I mean by this is, that in previous editions TEW's popularity (both for workers and companies) seems to change quicker than it does in real life, although I can't judge this for TEW 20 yet as I haven't been able to play enough. I like this and think that it makes the game more enjoyable, as it means that your actions as the booker have larger and more immediate consequences. This results in both penalties and successes feeling more punitive or rewarding, as they have more impact on rapidly shifting popularity. Perhaps, for some, this makes penalties seem harder to palate, as they feel that their company is being unduly negatively impacted for a skill point here or a minute there.
The flip-side is that positives are also enhanced by this more rapid growth or decline model. However, sometimes people (and by people I mean me) ignore this side of the coin. I know that I see the good grades that I receive because of skilled workers in appropriate matches as being a result of my amazing booking, but then blame the game mechanics when I get penalties, ignoring that fact that somewhere along the line I probably got an equal and opposite reward that just isn't in bright red text.