Post by Azherae on 2021-11-21 16:44:35
We have not received permission from Marzzo to share the quoted post.
@Vaknar you're gonna have to give us a little more than that
The head of the UI team at my last position would have rolled his eyes at this answer. Customizable UI is hard, and hard leads to buggy, or weird interactions. If we'd asked a client this question, we'd have been wanting to know 'what is the lowest level of complexity we can get away with and you still be happy?'
I'm fully willing to believe that Intrepid is willing to devote weeks to perfect customizable UI 'because the playerbase demands it' and 'you can't rush perfection', but if that's the case, the question is in fact completely moot.
"Just make literally everything customizable, end of discussion."
For those unfamiliar with the way these things are built, there's a big difference between:
'This component can't move but can be shown or hidden'
'This component can be put in different, set places, and it will cause other components to move or swap places with it'
'This component can't move but can be resized'
'This component can be put in different, set places, and also resized'
'This component can be put anywhere on screen'
in most systems. If Intrepid isn't using such a system and have easy, lossless customizability, they didn't need to ask this question, they just needed a LOT of QA, which doesn't have as much to do, with us. So even the answer of 'wanting to spark discussion' doesn't seem right. Discussion of what? It's like asking people to discuss 'what they prefer at a buffet'. The correct answer is always 'as many options as possible'. People 'discussing' whether or not any given 'food' should be there doesn't need to happen, the answer will always be 'just add it' unless you're running out of space.
'Are you running out of space?'