Darwoth wrote:slot based inventory has always sucked, copy UO's encumberance based inventory system imo
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
ImpalerWrG wrote: people can pick up and run with these instantly,
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
JohnCarver wrote:ImpalerWrG wrote: people can pick up and run with these instantly,
Your argument against the superior system is people are not familiar with it?
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
ImpalerWrG wrote:First rule of Interface: The quicker an interface is learn-able and usable the better it is.
JC wrote:I'm not fully committed to being wrong on that yet.
Kandarim wrote:That is so incredibly short-sighted. An interface should be intuitive to use, and allow someone that never worked with it before to figure it out easily without any help. I dread to think of the kind of person that needs their hand held to understand how an encumbrance system works. An interface should never be "learnable": it should be self-evident.
ImpalerWrG wrote:Intuitive interfaces would be lowest amount of learning and fastest to use, exactly what I said was optimum, I simply stated the general principle of how to compare one interface to another. The truly self-evident interface is an unattainable ideal.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests