There’s the size and shape of the icons and the art style of the icons. Adam didn’t clarify which of those or both the council influenced. There may have been council feedback on the icons which was not adopted in the game.
Personally I agree the current neutral gold icons have poor communication and do not reflect the Age franchise at all. Would a neutral colored stop sign have the same impact as a red colored stop sign? I think not.
I get it that the gold is part of the style of the game but they could still leave a gold border around the shape of the icons and cell shade them with full color. Best of both worlds. Might even have a cool stained-glass like appearance.
Personal subjective opinion: I think the new UI is an improvement. Its cleaner, easier to read, and more attractive. All those various icons from previous games that have been included for comparison do not look particularly attractive to me. They look both dated and unclear.
To amplify this, at game speed, I dont have time to look directly and process icons the way you do when watching a video or looking at an image. I need things to jump out from the corner of my eyes, and varying colors and shapes are really good at this.
A uniform, minimalist aesthetic is fine in many places, but not here. Icons in AoE games have a job – they must convey information extremely quickly. I also submit Unit icons have a secondary job of connecting the players to the units at a humanizing level.
Two-toned neutral abstract images are really, really poor at performing these tasks. Perhaps you all will feel differently when you all play and you have to throw the brake, stop, and stare at the icons in bewilderment just to figure out what on earth it is trying to tell you.
This is not itself game breaking, but it is a small harm to the game. And if you add up enough small harms, you end with a game that is substantially underperforming from where it should be.
I hope this UI is easier to read for people. I have seen players here say they find it that way. I can say, however, that in my experience using it, it has quite the opposite effect. AoE4 is the only time in my 23 years with this franchise where I had to actively slowdown and stare at an icon to figure out what on earth it is.
Yeah, I really think there is a large element of subjective experience here. I read your post just a bit ago and it was really well argued on why it slows you down and things are not easily recognized in the moment because of their simple abstractions. Makes sense… and yet, I seem to just operate a different way. The variety of colors in the other icons seems to have the opposite effect for me. Maybe just differences in how we process things?
Well, I will say I have not had the pleasure to play it yet and you have. Maybe playing it will change my opinion. But I’ve played other games and I do seem to adapt much more quickly to more minimalist UIs.
Some people cannot just distinguish a design principle and “the actual implementation of that design principle”.
Clarity and simplicity is great, okay.
But does that mean there is literally no room to add a liiiittle historical flavor or uniqueness or aesthetics? Is there no other way to make clear and simple icons?
and these some ppl seem to be the ones working on the game it seems they would also know. Which I assume. yet they chose to present it the way it is. so maybe, maybe they did all they could, and made the UI as nice looking as they thought was best?
I personally love the icons for example look at the faith tec carpet. its good looking and easy to identify
They made these icons to be simplistic.
I dislike them NOT because they are simplistic, but because they are not good looking, and lack historical flavor like all its predecessors.
No “detail” is not my problem either. I’m more concerned about styles.
Like you can design very identifiable icons with either (1) the medieval stained glass style or (2) the modern traffic sign style, and both can be simplistic or detailed, universal or unique. But I’d prefer the former in a game like this.
while thats understandable and sounds nie, i wouldnt want that. far to colorful and therefore distractiing. also I can very easily distinguish the stop sign styled icons . I couldnt wirh stained glass
I am pretty sure the stained glass was just an example and the point is that there are many ways to design icons that are all the things we need at once. Of course, we already know this, because icons have never once in the history of ever been a cause of confusion in the Age series.
Color is all I ask for. Can’t stand how monotonous they look. Even those upgrade ones. Give them some color, create a nice little camel in front of a clear blue sky or a dry dessert, anything. It will connect me with the Abbasids as a civ.
On units, some say they would be fine even with unit models. I’m not. Those usually low resolution compressed images of game’s models were fine for their time but it’s not good enough. They should be drawn pictures that will be offering me compensation for the lack of unit textures or when I decide zoom out.
And they should be different for each civ, it gives them character and I feel that I actually play something different each time. This is history. Chinese villagers did not look the same as English ones. Nor in terms of physical appearance nor in terms of clothing.
Take a look here. Some people really underestimate what aoe3 has done with its drawn icons. Even villagers have their own drawn pictures.
Villagers
Soldiers
Natives
Animals
Upgrades - Techs
That’s just a sample of course. All these icons are small pieces of art, mini paintings that I like taking my time to appreciate and see what they are telling me. When I close the game, it’s those little things that stick in my head and make me want to reopen it later. Monochromatic symbols say absolutely nothing
And I don’t agree with what Andy said that they have to send me the information extremely quickly. That’s not why I ask for them. I don’t know if those icons can do that compared to the minimalistic icons aboves, perhaps they dont.
But it’s absolutely ok if I don’t grasp everything the first time I open the game. Some things have to be learnt. It’s ok to take time. They add greatly to the overall atmosphere and create a bond with the game.
This is the exact philosophy that all those browser games follow and many of them are way more successful even than actual PC games. Despite the fact that you don’t have animations and little units to drag around, you have well made paintings of your units or buildings or technologies and that’s more than enough for so many people.
That’s pretty much all I had to say, perhaps I forget some of them that had in mind before the post becomes an essay but whatever.
I also hadn’t thought about the stained glass but I love it as an idea. Just the thought of it reminded me of the artistic unit cards that Total War: Rome 2 introduced for the first time in the whole series:
yes, I know. but it was an example which I would find looking well, fitting the theme, but it just doesnt tick the box of clarity.
as said, the devs did (probably) study or learn their job. that usually includes UI experts. Now if they were tasked to create a thematic fitting and readaable, not over the top UI, and thats what they came up with (it is), maybe there either was no way for them to make it look more picturesque, or the design team didnt like the approaches, or tons of other possible options. (Including, but not exclusively, readability)
I hear yall saying the old icons looked great. now Its not you job aswell, but maybe also provide ideas that may work, or even concepts? because it seems there were none the devs found and deemed fitting. which I personally understand.
And for now, the stained glass idea was the only one I heard of so far
you ask for color, I would ask for the opposite, which we already have.
Color is looking nice, but also more information to progress, which I o not think is necessary or helpful for pro players or newcomers alike. Unsless there is a VERY clear color scheme dividing military/eco buildings, defensive/offensice upgrades etc.
But if color is your issue, I am sure icons will be moddable in the future, so they can then be any color ypou like
btw a general note - the creation of icons portraing exactly what they should is also very hard work. Its probably even more work than simply drawing exactly what you see. just wanted to note that here. creation of icons is a class of work within UI Design itself often forgotten/ less valued. But thats not fair
Things like that attract the newcomers in.
Military/eco buildings are already separated with tabs in aoe2.
Another good example is how stronghold does it
Yes I don’t understand why UI designers are just soulless and not having fun anymore. These flat mobile app type icons just breath corporate and does not look lively or have any personality. Old devs used to even add certain Easter eggs to icons and UI or try to tell a mini story.
People should have more fun at work and put some creativity to UI and icon design, these corporate flat mailer type icons should not be used in video games as videogames are more aspirational, where people take time to enjoy.
SC2 icons looks dope
Don’t know what has happened to Relic, even though DOW 3 was bad their icons looked good
as I stated, it has nothing to do with not having fun or being soulless. The age 4 icons look very well crafted and hought out.
However they do fit the modern theme, and lookhow Icons evolved, for example the one of google, chrome, Firefox, Edge. They ten to get more abstract with the years. So age team just went with the time.
SC2 icons look nice, yes. But you do need to know what means what to get what they are for. The icons in Age4, its easy to assume what they will probably do. which also shows the great work done.
it seems they would also know. Which I assume. yet they chose to present it the way it is. so maybe, maybe they did all they could, and made the UI as nice looking as they thought was best?
