Any plans to overhaul the UI?

[Enigma89]

Title says it all, it seems to be a common barrier from keeping people away from the game.

[stburr91]

I find it very strange that people would not play a game they otherwise enjoy simply because of dated UI. I have my doubts that this is much of a barrier, 2k textures, and no VR are reasons people wouldn't play, but dated UI, I don't see it being enough of a barrier to justify the expense of overhauling it. 

 

With that said, I think everyone would enjoy an updated UI once more pressing issues are addressed. 

Edited September 22, 2022 by stburr91

[Rei-sen]

16 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

I find it very strange that people would not play a game they otherwise enjoy simply because of dated UI

How about such simple thing as changing your loadout? This issue only is a big turn off.

[Enigma89]

16 minutes ago, stburr91 said:

I find it very strange that people would not play a game they otherwise enjoy simply because of dated UI. I have my doubts that this is much of a barrier, 2k textures, and no VR are reasons people wouldn't play, but dated UI, I don't see it being enough of a barrier to justify the expense of overhauling it. 

 

With that said, I think everyone would enjoy an updated UI once more pressing issues are addressed. 

It's not because the UI is dated, it's because the UI is frustrating to use. I am not exaggerating but the IL-2 1946 UI is easier to use than the one in CLOD. I know because I got incredibly frustrated trying to re-bind CLOD recently and just went through the binding process in 1946 and it was no problem.

[stburr91]

Just now, Arthur-A said:

How about such simple thing as changing your loadout? This issue only is a big turn off.

 

I completely agree, I find the inability to change your loadout in singleplayer many times more off-putting than the UI. 

Just now, Enigma89 said:

It's not because the UI is dated, it's because the UI is frustrating to use. I am not exaggerating but the IL-2 1946 UI is easier to use than the one in CLOD. I know because I got incredibly frustrated trying to re-bind CLOD recently and just went through the binding process in 1946 and it was no problem.

 

I'm very new to flight sims, and after a couple of minutes of figuring out how the binding worked in CLoD, I had no issues with it, and it was very easy. 

 

I do agree with you that the UI is quite dated, my point was that I don't see it as enough of an issues to justify the expense, and use of resources for such a small team with (no doubt) a very limited budget.   

[343KKT_Kintaro]

I can't remember where in this forum exactly, but I think the devs already said that there is great difficulty in modifying the user interface whithout seriously affecting the game. Anyway... apparently the devs are very busy with a programme of works that throws the remodelling of the user interface ages into the future:

 

STEP 1 (before release of version 6.0):

1) TrueSKY (static weather though)

2) VR

3) 4K cockpits

4) 4k external models

5) 4k terrain tiles for the maps

6) Improvement of the 3D effect in the maps

7) 10x view distance increase

STEP 2 (at realease of version 6.0):

8 ) All sounds of engines refitted

9) TrueSKY (this time with dynamic weather)

10) Release of the new add-on (a new map, new flyable aircraft, new vehicles, etc.)

 

No need to say that all of this is very time consuming for the devs. In my humble opinion, there is little chance that a user interface remodelling happens in the near future.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2022 by 343KKT_Kintaro
flayable -> flyable

[Sokol1]

1 hour ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I can't remember where in this forum exactly, but I think the devs already said that there is great difficulty in modifying the user interface whithout seriously affecting the game.

 

In "Bananas days" Luthier confess their team inability to change the UI and later TF more or less confirm this.  

[Dagwoodyt]

The Visual Update is a distraction from underlying UI issues. Once the Visual Update is released there will be an upward spike in the Steam DB graph. Whether the upward useage stats can persist until TF 6.0 surfaces remains to be seen.

Edited September 22, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[343KKT_Kintaro]

17 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

The Visual Update is a distraction from underlying UI interface issues.

 

 

Don't you think you assume too much, Dagwoodyt? I'll keep as a more serious statement, that one of by Enigma89: "it seems to be a common barrier from keeping people away from the game". Indeed, even if I encounter no issues when using the UI as it is, I can understand that others do not like it. So, maybe, yes, maybe, you could be right, and this specific UI could prevent the game from increasing his online activity and number of players even AFTER the visual update. Time will tell.

 

Oh, by the way, while we are here: dear Dagwoodyt, in these very same forums, I sent you one private message on the 26th of August, that was one month ago... and the message still appears as "Not read yet"... would you kindly open it and read it? That would be lovely, really. Thank you in advance.

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

3 hours ago, Sokol1 said:

 

In "Bananas days" Luthier confess their team inability to change the UI and later TF more or less confirm this.  

If the UI is immutable due to complexity of underlying game code that would seem to preclude a QMB, "native" DCG, career mode and revised SP ammo/convergence settings module.

Edited September 22, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[Mysticpuma]

I have no idea which forum I read it on but I was sure I did read (from Buzzsaw) that they were looking to 9verhaul or at least update the UI... but that was quite a while ago, so things may have changed. 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Personally for me the UI is not hard to use at all regarding the mapping of buttons etc. As of weapon loadouts I did some online and saved them as settings per plane I use. Used FMB too etc. Sure a bit cumbersome, but let´s say you fly like a couple of planes, it won´t take long to make a few loadout presets and save it. 

[BOO]

Overall, the GUI has the whiff of "unfinished" about it. Even if the GUI cannot be radically changed thare are a number of factors that could be improved. There are paintschemes with working titles and duplicates, option boxes that do nothing, confusion around weapon placement in the guns that could be resolved in the naming of the weapon, default loadouts that fail to indicate what the convergence and something of a learning curve to shell types and purpose that a description could help with. 

[OBT-Lionel]

Don't let TFS waste time on this.

 

The interface is very well like that!

 

There are much more interesting developments to be made.

[Dagwoodyt]

3 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

Don't let TFS waste time on this.

 

The interface is very well like that!

 

There are much more interesting developments to be made.

This is the same argument that was raised in opposition to pursuing VR support and it deflects from discussion of desirable SP feature enhancements.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

This is a distraction from this, that is a distraction from that...

 

This deflects from this, that deflects from that...

 

Hey... Dagwoodyt... relax...

 

 

[OBT-Eazy]

Dagwoodyt, still not applied as project manager?
Come on, I'm sure you have native leadership skills.

[Dagwoodyt]

Burned those "Flatscreen Forever Club" uniforms yet?  ?

[Sokol1]

At least could be hidden from UI what don't work, or not work as expected.

Examples:

 

The loadout button in missions  - just add frustration.

The controls - specially in aircraft could be sub titled - eg. control of plane, control of engine...

The training module - don't help anyone and hurt the game image, a reminder of the  bugs.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

7 minutes ago, Sokol1 said:

The loadout button in missions  - just add frustration.

 

 

What button is that one? Any screenshot available Sokol1?

 

 

7 minutes ago, Sokol1 said:

The controls - specially in aircraft could be sub titled - eg. control of plane, control of engine...

 

 

Do you mean the "mouse roll-over" labels in the cockpits, Sokol1?

 

 

7 minutes ago, Sokol1 said:

The training module - don't help anyone and hurt the game image, a reminder of the  bugs.

 

 

Agreed! That one should be hidden from the user interface... it is quite buggy but I guess that TFS still keeps it available in the game for the principle of presenting a simulator that allows both training with other players (multiplayer) and training with the machine (single-player mode).

 

 

[OBT-Eazy]

2 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Burned those "Flatscreen Forever Club" uniforms yet?  ?

No but got the headset already and a PC ready for the big one.  

[Sokol1]

23 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Do you mean the "mouse roll-over" labels in the cockpits, Sokol1?

 

No I mean in controls GUI there in Aircraft category are dozens for controls, in one list. 

 

 

it's difficult to find, for example "mixture control", but if this list is broken in more specific ones,  e.g. airplane controls, engine controls, weapons controls, auxiliary controls.. one goes for "engine controls" and search there. If want set trims go for "airplane controls", etc.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 minutes ago, Sokol1 said:

 

No I mean in controls GUI there in Aircraft category are dozens for controls, in one list. 

 

 

it's difficult to find, for example "mixture control", but if this list is broken in more specific ones,  e.g. airplane controls, engine controls, weapons controls, auxiliary controls.. one goes for "engine controls" and search there. If want set trims go for "airplane controls", etc.

 

 

I really have no problem with that Sokol1... and apparently others do not have neither...

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

We all have personal preferences. I have long used game stats as the effective index of player consensus relative to TF 5.0.

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

I usually don’t make posts like this but the monotone has become too prevalent in recent times. So please excuse me, but here goes.

 

Hell, I don‘t even need a GUI, I can edit my ini files directly and it’s quicker.

I don’t need a Joystick Wizard, I don’t need a dynamic campaign generator… I don’t even need single player.

 

I don’t have a problem with having to set loadouts for dozens of aircraft that have the same armament in game since I know my way around the ini files.

 

I don‘t have to find key bindings quickly, since I remember where they are, I don’t need to have  Fuel Cock 2 named „GM-1 System activation“ because I know it turns my GM valve in the 109 Z variant.

 

I also don’t need to have the empty grey info window sorted out because I can use info windows, I don’t even need default info windows because I can set them up myself.

 

And I don’t need the game to work properly since I can troubleshoot it and avoid the problems myself.
 

I didn‘t need a correction to the 109 snap spin because why would anyone even turn fight in a 109… I also don‘t need a correction to both my ailerons being disabled when one of them gets hit. I hardly ever get hit.
 

And that noseart option under loadout, who cares, I know it doesn‘t work. And that setting up my loadout in single player doesn‘t have any affect also isn‘t a problem because I don’t use it.
Also thanks for all the bug fixing but hey, don‘t waste any more time with it since I played this when it came out and anything is better than that.
 

Should I go on? It doesn‘t sound ridiculous?

 

The UI (and many other things) is clearly bad. Being used to it and other CloD’s „it’s CloD“ things also don’t turn them into features or good things.

Go read the bad reviews on Steam and comments on this board, Reddit etc. to see what the most problematic issues are in the eyes of new players.

 

Repeating you are ok with something obviously bad doesn‘t make obviously bad things go away just because it isn‘t a problem for you. It is detrimental to the game.
 

Tone the gate keeping down a bit. There aren‘t many people left inside anyways. Better make it easier for players to play this game if anyone ever wants to see a successful CloD in the future. Or even have a CloD future.

 

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

J-Hat, personally I'm not happy with many things in this simulator, but not the user interface. If the game hadn't had the bugs it had, "Rise of Flight" would have been eliminated by natural selection, "Cliffs of Dover" would have been a success, the players of the first community formed during the decade 2001-2011 would have gotten used to this user interface perfectly, and the "Great Battles" series would never have existed. It has nothing to do with the user interface, the problem is elsewhere.

[Dagwoodyt]

It is undeniable that Blitz is crushing RoF in Steam DB stats ?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Dagwoodyt, please, be smarter than that.

 

1) "Rise of Flight would have been eliminated by natural selection"... this means "Rise of Flight wouldn't have become Great Battles".

 

2) "Great Battles series would never have existed"... this means (in connection with the present thread!), "we wouldn't have a Cliffs of Dover community that demands a user interface like the user interface in Great Battles".

 

The problem, J-Hat & Dagwoodyt, is that you don't understand that what we talk about... is nothing but the user interface in "Cliffs of Dover - Blitz". This is what I'm talking about. I'm just responding to the original post. This is why all what I'm saying is... "the problem is elsewhere". So please reread my arguments. Calmly.

 

Cheerio...

 

 

[BOO]

19 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Dagwoodyt, please, be smarter than that.

 

1) "Rise of Flight would have been eliminated by natural selection"... this means "Rise of Flight wouldn't have become Great Battles".

 

2) "Great Battles series would never have existed"... this means (in connection with the present thread!), "we wouldn't have a Cliffs of Dover community that demands a user interface like the user interface in Great Battles".

 

The problem, J-Hat & Dagwoodyt, is that you don't understand that what we talk about... is nothing but the user interface in "Cliffs of Dover - Blitz". This is what I'm talking about. I'm just responding to the original post. This is why all what I'm saying is... "the problem is elsewhere". So please reread my arguments. Calmly.

 

Cheerio...

 

 

Hello Kintaro

 

Couple of points if I may

 

I think J-Hat nailed it TBH. Old hats at CloD have worked around the issues for so long the GUI has become irrelevent. But we did so largly because CloD was the best option out of a small and bad bunch at the time. Not the case these days.

 

The user interface, regardless of what you personally feel about it in the grand scheme of things remains less than ideal. If it cannot be radically changed it can certainly be improved. And should be. The game still "assumes" a level of knowledge from its customers that it really doesnt need to. 

 

There is a considerable amount of anecdotal evidence about showing that new users have problems with setting up in the game and are confused by odd entries, redundant buttons and selections, loadout configuations and the limitations of SP. As an example I'll use my friend Sinerox. He's a very switched on 20 something, a capable simmer and a qualified pilot in RL who gave up on Clod because of the GUI. So have 3 or 4 other people Ive introduced. So it is a problem whether you and the OBT squad preceive it as such or not. Perhaps not the biggest problem overall but certainly a large contributor the the overall impression of malaise that the game currently suffers from. Its a dirty shop window with dead flies along the sill. Not very enticing.

 

Finally the OP - Enigma. If he says its an issue - Id also say its an issue. Guy creates and runs great and highly popular PVP/PVE servers and is well connected within the community. No doubt when he refers to common barriers hes speaking out of the expereince of talking to others as well as his own.  Like Reddog, he's just the kind of fella TFS (actually WE)  needs to be enthusing if MP is ever going to be a serious thing in CloD again. 

 

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

I use post activity on several fora and Steam DB activity to get a feel for how things are going with Blitz. If Blitz is perfect but for its' UI how do I (rationally) separate the two??

Edited September 24, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[343KKT_Kintaro]

I accept what you say BOO.

 

What I'm saying is that without Great Battles, there would not be such an intense debate about the user interface. There would some discussions about it, why not, but what we do have now, after ten years of Great Battles (2012-2022) is a strong and large Great Battles community who pushes in the direction of the pressing need for an easier to use user interface in "Cliffs of Dover". And, please read again my previous posts, in response to "common barrier from keeping people away from the game"... what I do answer is... "the problem is elsewhere".

 

 

[No.54_Reddog]

16 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

I use post activity on several fora and Steam DB activity to get a feel for how things are going with Blitz. If Blitz is perfect but for its' UI how do I (rationally) separate the two??

 

Are you suggesting that a 22.6 player average over the past 30 days is showing CLOD in anything but the rudest of health and peak of popularity?

[Bell]

Lacking QMB like il2 1946 is really unbearable.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/63950/discussions/0/620696522000807435/

Edited September 24, 2022 by Bell

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 hour ago, Bell said:

Lacking QMB

 

 

Reread title and stay on topic please, we talk about the user interface here.

 

 

1 hour ago, Bell said:

is really unbearable

 

 

Unbearable, really? May I suggest you... no, nothing.

 

 

Edited September 25, 2022 by 343KKT_Kintaro

[BOO]

43 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I accept what you say BOO.

 

What I'm saying is that without Great Battles, there would not be such an intense debate about the user interface. There would some discussions about it, why not, but what we do have now, after ten years of Great Battles (2012-2022) is a strong and large Great Battles community who pushes in the direction of the pressing need for an easier to use user interface in "Cliffs of Dover". And, please read again my previous posts, in response to "common barrier from keeping people away from the game"... what I do answer is... "the problem is elsewhere".

 

 

I dont think its the GB-ers necessarily or a desire for easier. Im not a GB-er and I think the UI is awful and convoluted.  Im not influenced by GB or DCS - Ive always thought it was awful. This is not a new opinion. So I have to disagree that its just a perception thing.

 

For what its worth though - Im not especially enamoured with any sims UI TBH.  I just think that, for the sake of a few small changes, CloDs could be better.  

10 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Unbearable, really? May I suggest you..

 

 

Hopefully thats something thats been lost in translation Kintaro - regardless thats a little strong my friend. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by BOO

[BOO]

Just now, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

"without Great Battles, there would not be such an intense debate about the user interface"... this doesn't refer to you, BOO, but to the situation in general for ten years now. Please respond to what I'm really saying.

 

"really unbearable" is nothing but an exageration from bell. A suggestion of committing suicide is nothing but a humorous way to express that: he exaggerates... for this is a flight sim, some kind of a category of video games. The flight sim was bugged at release in 2011 and a few guys are trying to fix it the best they can. There's nothing unbearable in there. Please you people go back to the reality.

 

 

I am responding. I just dont see it as you do. I agree there is a core of GB player who wish for CloD to go away but, on this point I think Enigma's point is valid. The UI has always been an issue to CloD - I cant recall how many posts I answered on ATAG from new players needing clarification and help with various aspects of it. Its been tidied somewhat by TFS in the past couple of years but there is more that could still be done. 

 

In relation to the latter point , "unbearable" is perhaps OTT but regardless of what you intended, I would still advise you to delete the reference. There are better ways to point out the exaggeration that perhaps dont sail as close to the forum rule winds or potentially affect others however unintentionally. 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Done, "reference" deleted BOO...

 

Now, Boo, please tell me, how long this will take before somebody else, a long experienced player as usual, opens, again, a new thread on the user interface? or on the quick mission builder? or on the Bf 108 dual controls? or on... ? Well, I think you got it... didn't you?

 

The ten items distributed all along the two above described steps are, apparently, the current programme of works of TFS. I have no power to increase the number of items in the list, do you have such power BOO? or you Bell? You can complain about everything else, I don't think their programme will change for a year or two. Everything else is just useless talk.

 

 

[BOO]

Just now, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Done, "reference" deleted BOO...

 

Now, Boo, please tell me, how long this will take before somebody else, a long experienced player as usual, opens, again, a new thread on the user interface? or on the quick mission builder? or on the Bf 108 dual controls? or on... ? Well, I think you got it... didn't you?

 

The ten items distributed all along the two above described steps are, apparently, the current programme of works of TFS. I have no power to increase the number of items in the list, do you have such power BOO? or you Bell? You can complain about everything else, I don't think their programme will change for a year or two. Everything else is just useless talk.

 

 

We can. And we probably will. Such is the nature of a forum.

 

My interest isnt upsetting the apple cart. My interest is getting enough back on line so Im not rattling about in a server on my own playing the same mission I was playing 6 years ago. Any obsticle to that is, in my view, worth discussing. The game can be as pretty as it likes but those items that so irk you are, by the very fact they are raised as often as you claim, clearly of relevence to others as they are irrelevent to you. 

 

Without decent SP, there will be fewer players who come over to MP as there is nothing in the game for them in the first instance. Without a QMB there is less to recommend the game in comparison with its peers. The easier it is to set up, the less issues people will have that cause to give up and go back to the familiar. 

 

People move on and often for good. The game cant rely soley on past players returning, tails between legs, begging forgivness for their disloyalty and lack of faith whilst forgiving its sins. New players are needed. And in some numbers. And new players will expect. 

 

Oh......the dual control on the Taufin is essential btw (ok it isnt - that we can agree on)

[Dagwoodyt]

Players who have left Blitz and those who bought but won't play without VR will show up when the Visual Update drops. Once the "new" wears off, this topic will be revisited. Is there an ex officio entitlement to silence discussion? ?

Edited September 25, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[MisterSmith]

I can figure out what was said by inference and extrapolation. Thank you for moderating yourselves before anything official had to happen.

 

Smith