[Burtonshaw]

I do not want to belittle the new theme or work that has been undertaken, but although this theme is extremely pretty, it screws with my head when attempting to read posts.

It is because of this reason that i ask if the old theme may be available for selection.

Again, i do like this theme, but it just messes with my head. sorry guys.

[Sharpkiller]

I do not want to belittle the new theme or work that has been undertaken, but although this theme is extremely pretty, it screws with my head when attempting to read posts.

It is because of this reason that i ask if the old theme may be available for selection.

Again, i do like this theme, but it just messes with my head. sorry guys.

I'm sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, in addition to launching a new theme, we also upgraded to vBulletin 4. Our previous theme was designed for vBulletin 3, thus rendering it incompatible with vBulletin 4. vBulletin is currently developing a tool which will allow us to convert the previous theme so it is compatible with vBulletin 4. However, I don't think they've announced an ETA yet.

If I may ask, what exactly is making it difficult to read the post area? Is it the font color? The black background? We tried to keep the area as minimalistic as possible.

[Burtonshaw]

Thanks for the information, i did not know that the systems were incompatible.

I think it may be the contrast between white text and black background, as i am able to read the reply area without any difficulty.

Sorry for bringing this up, perhaps i could adjust some of my computers settings to fix this. i do not want to create any more work for the community.

Edit : 29 March 2011 @ 2048 GMT

I have found a way that works (not sure why i did not think of it earlier) by inverting the colours using the in-built windows magnifier program.

[Firestorm]

I wasn't going to say anything but I agree. I was reading the forums for about 15 mins the other day, and it really messed with my eyes.

I also find it difficult to navigate. If there is any sort of colour coding between read and unread forums, I can't figure it out. Even when I press "mark forums are read" some forums still seem to remain blue while the others become grey.

I think it can be too "busy" and complicated at times and some areas are visually indistinguishable from others, its easy to get "lost".

I don't not like it. I definitely prefer the old one though. If given the choice of a completely normal theme I think I would choose to use that one (even if its just the default one).

[Sharpkiller]

I wasn't going to say anything but I agree. I was reading the forums for about 15 mins the other day, and it really messed with my eyes.

I also find it difficult to navigate. If there is any sort of colour coding between read and unread forums, I can't figure it out. Even when I press "mark forums are read" some forums still seem to remain blue while the others become grey.

I think it can be too "busy" and complicated at times and some areas are visually indistinguishable from others, its easy to get "lost".

I don't not like it. I definitely prefer the old one though. If given the choice of a completely normal theme I think I would choose to use that one (even if its just the default one).

We might be able to look at tweaking the font colour a bit to help make it easier to read, but beyond that we're not able to do much about it.

As for forums which have unread posts, there's a rectangle beside the forum name button which changes from blue to orange when there's a new post in that forum.



The colour of the forum name button changes depending on the clearance level.


The colour of this button means that it is CL1, which is accessible to everyone.


The colour of this button means that it is CL2, which is accessible only to Embassy Staff and Foreign Diplomats.


The colour of this button means that it is CL3, which is accessible to all members.


The colour of this button means that it is CL4, which is only accessible to members who have been granted access to that forum.


The colour of this button means that it is CL5, which is only accessible to members who hold CO/XO positions within the fleet.


The colour of this button means that it is CL6, which is only accessible to members of Starfleet Command.

The button colours correspond to the usergroup colours we use on the forums. Essentially the colour of the button replaces the old [CL#] tags that were present in forum names.

[Mason Brodie]

Do you think there should be an FAQ about the current forum setup in case there are other nuances that other people may not know about? Or has there been one provided? I don't know if there's much else to say, but it may help other people (new or old members) who are coming into this for the first time? I have to admit, there is a lot to take in at first glance.

[Sharpkiller]

Do you think there should be an FAQ about the current forum setup in case there are other nuances that other people may not know about? Or has there been one provided? I don't know if there's much else to say, but it may help other people (new or old members) who are coming into this for the first time? I have to admit, there is a lot to take in at first glance.

There is a section on the website in the Fleet Guide which deals with the Forum Structure. If members are having difficulties, perhaps we can this kind of information to it as well.

[Ninja]

I've kept relatively quiet but would like to post my opinion. I also find it difficult to read. Here's some advice and experience i've gained as a career professional in web site design. I don't expect any of this to change, and i totally appreciate the time put in - but i hope it might be helpful for future projects.

- Studies have shown that all caps text is taxing on the eyes, add to that that the ST font squeezes them together and it doubles that effect.
- Also studies have shown that reading blocks of white text on black background also tire the eyes.
- When you have a lot of contrasting colors instead of complimentary colors (see color theory wheel) it makes things difficult to see as the eye naturally is attracted to bright colors. So typically websites reserve "hot" colors for mouse rollovers and high priority call to action buttons like a "buy it now" or "submit"
- Too many color schemes for too many different classifications, etc. Some websites have used color coding for different sections of their site, for example an "About Us" section's primary color is blue. But once you're in that section sub menus and the like are perhaps different shades of blue. But most websites have a specific primary color which is associated with their branding, with complimentary sub colors and reversed logos for use with different type of media. Almost every brand that exists follows this rule. At the heart of visual brand psychology is association with a consistent symbol (the logo) and primary color (the color theme).
- People generally read websites a bit differently than books. They read left to right, right diagonal to left, left to right and repeat. The eyes exit out the right hand corner. This is why logos on most page are at the top left and bottom right. This is also why navigation bars usually span left to right and left side top down.
- Usage of javascript or DHTML or flash to create sliding menus and rollovers and drop downs allows you to make a rather simple presentation of main / high priority menu items, and then when the user mouses over, they're given sub categories. In this site, everything is pretty much given to you up front so it's overwhelming.
- Clickable buttons are usually differentiated by shape, color, design treatment, or font. But on this site non-clickable buttons or title menu's or items share the same button shape, font, and colors. This leads to confusion.
- There's some vertical waste of space with the vent thingys at the top and the overly large banner image, frequency graphic, etc. Also IMO the ShoutBox while nice to have, isn't necessary and takes up a huge amount of screen real estate as well. Huge forum sig graphics also add to clutter and eat up screen space. Keep in mind most people aren't using 25"+ monitors and 1920x1080 resolution...
- People have told me that i need to "get used to the site" but in my opinion shouldn't have to be that way. A well designed site should be easy to navigate upon launch. This is why we have entire departments dedicated to UI/UX design and development. The reason why there is commonality in web site designs and a consistency is because this layout is a tried and true method, tested and verified by thousands of IA professionals.

[Christopher Halsey]

If Gene Roddenberry wanted it then it gets my thumbs up :mrgreen:

[John Hathaway]

I do not want to belittle the new theme or work that has been undertaken, but although this theme is extremely pretty, it screws with my head when attempting to read posts.

It is because of this reason that i ask if the old theme may be available for selection.

Again, i do like this theme, but it just messes with my head. sorry guys.

Hi Burtonshaw

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond, I can understand the comment and echo from Firestorm. I'll be speaking with Sharpkiller and we'll try and tweak the font colour so it's a little less contrasting and easier on the eye.

Ninja, I certainly appreciate feedback and hopefully my responses will prove to be enlightening, as we haven't had a chance to discuss the design or the philosophy behind it. While I don't have a history of website design, my background is also largely based in design, having studied design in college, and to a lesser degree in university and working for a company designing cards, themed objects (franchise based mainly), packaging and for a few years now the company's sales ad videos.

- Studies have shown that all caps text is taxing on the eyes, add to that that the ST font squeezes them together and it doubles that effect.

Indeed, but as you'll no doubt notice all caps are kept to a minimum, and are used mainly in titles. Where large blocks of text are located however, lower case has been used for better ease - as can be seen on the website. This is done in order to maintain the style's authenticity.

- Also studies have shown that reading blocks of white text on black background also tire the eyes.

I've covered that topic above and I believe Sharp has made mention of it as well. So we'll be tweaking that quite soon.

- When you have a lot of contrasting colors instead of complimentary colors (see color theory wheel) it makes things difficult to see as the eye naturally is attracted to bright colors. So typically websites reserve "hot" colors for mouse rollovers and high priority call to action buttons like a "buy it now" or "submit"

Again this comes down to representing the Star Trek franchise in a believable and familiar fashion. Although where it has been possible, I've kept certain colours aside for specific functions, like for example the "New Thread" or "Post Reply" buttons are kept orange where the surrounding colours are kept a shade of blue. Similarly over all titles remain blue with large white text, and sub titles remain yellow with smaller black text. So while it may not be instantly obvious, there is method to the madness, and not just random use of colours .
Just to follow on, the colours that have been used are canon, from Star Trek: Nemesis, so I've had a limited pool of colours to use from.

- Too many color schemes for too many different classifications, etc. Some websites have used color coding for different sections of their site, for example an "About Us" section's primary color is blue. But once you're in that section sub menus and the like are perhaps different shades of blue. But most websites have a specific primary color which is associated with their branding, with complimentary sub colors and reversed logos for use with different type of media. Almost every brand that exists follows this rule. At the heart of visual brand psychology is association with a consistent symbol (the logo) and primary color (the color theme).

I think this point probably covers a number of issues you raise, however I think the important thing to realise with this website is the demographic it's appealing to (specifically Star Trek gamers). I completely understand the concept of colour theory and how to employ it and if this were a company site or even startrek.com I wouldn't have designed the site as it is (because of the less specific demographic). With LCARS however you can't make up the colour scheme yourself, not if you want the result to appear authentic (quite a few sites have indulged on this and failed to varying degrees)... and as many will know, fans of the show are the most discerning individuals when it comes to their franchise - which is why I consulted a number of resources before embarking on the project. There are a lot of LCARS inspired websites on the internet, but very few follow what are quite specific rules to recreate them in a believable fashion. The website allowed some freedom, we have our main links down the left, and a few sub links within the page and the contents have a somewhat varied layout to keep things interesting but navigable, but of course vBulletin 4 is built rigidly and you have to go with what it provides while as aforementioned, keeping everything authentic looking.
While the site isn't as easy to navigate as say a corporate or shopping site, nor is it necessary to be so, so long as it isn't overtly difficult to locate items. I suppose what I'm saying is, for what the site is designed to accomplish, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. After all, if we want to stand out in the crowd, we can hardly recreate the basic designs of the two sites you made particular mention of in our "Welcome to your New Home" post.

- People generally read websites a bit differently than books. They read left to right, right diagonal to left, left to right and repeat. The eyes exit out the right hand corner. This is why logos on most page are at the top left and bottom right. This is also why navigation bars usually span left to right and left side top down.

With the logo in the banner, again it's not something that is going to cause a deleterious effect with our demographic, and LCARS design at times can dictate how you're going to layout your page. The same goes where title bars have text to the right rather than to the left. While it may not be as easy to have it this way, you either carry on with a theme or you abandon it. To create a hybrid will only lead to a haphazard mess aesthetically. You'll have to take that beef up with Mike Okuda lol.

deleterious- Usage of javascript or DHTML or flash to create sliding menus and rollovers and drop downs allows you to make a rather simple presentation of main / high priority menu items, and then when the user mouses over, they're given sub categories. In this site, everything is pretty much given to you up front so it's overwhelming.

Sharpkiller can possibly elaborate further on the technicals of this issue, however from my understanding, lighting the buttons could be done more easily in some areas than others, I think largely because of the varying code that's been used to put this forum software together. Personally I think it would be more confusing to have lit buttons on mouse over and perhaps on pressing, in some areas and not on others.
The other issue from my personal perspective was a time issue. When you perhaps consider the sheer amount of graphics that had to be created (I think Sharp mentioned something in the region of up to 900 individual images), to recreate a good portion twice or more over, has a knock on effect with development time. I took the decision at that point not to proceed, at least in the initial stages. However I think most buttons stand out on their own, and aren't accompanied by other "make believe" style buttons, so confusion should be kept to a minimum.

- Clickable buttons are usually differentiated by shape, color, design treatment, or font. But on this site non-clickable buttons or title menu's or items share the same button shape, font, and colors. This leads to confusion.

Again this is probably an issue of LCARS being such as it is. Although I'd be intrigued by any specific examples you could produce, as most non-clickable LCARS graphics are quite differently shaped from those that are, with a few exceptions which I've kept in separate areas from where clickable buttons are located as to try and avoid confusion but continue with the aesthetic of the site. Elsewhere non-clickable buttons perhaps simply have small numbers written on them, and should be easily distinguishable from those that are clickable with legible words.

- There's some vertical waste of space with the vent thingys at the top and the overly large banner image, frequency graphic, etc. Also IMO the ShoutBox while nice to have, isn't necessary and takes up a huge amount of screen real estate as well. Huge forum sig graphics also add to clutter and eat up screen space. Keep in mind most people aren't using 25"+ monitors and 1920x1080 resolution...

The "vent" is a red alert graphic (recreated from Voyager) one of a few which will be employed in the near future once some technical difficulties have been worked out. I believe we'll be explaining our alert statuses in the near future once that has been resolved. As for the large banner, again you've got to think of your demographic. For sure the banner can be smaller, I can put less detail in there, but for every detail you compromise on, it amounts to far more than just what might appear to be casual details on the surface. This partially goes toward again the "theme" concept I've been coming back to, and how compromising there can create more difficulties than perhaps is obvious on the surface.
On the subject of the shoutbox, I'm not sure if you mean on the index or thread pages. The {UFP} being big on the community aspect, a shoutbox is practically an essential component to allowing the community to communicate more effectively - communications being an incredibly important aspect in running a fleet. I could concede that it may not be necessary on subsequent pages, but I think that's purely going to be an individual choice, some people will prefer it was there, others won't - you can't "win" either way.
The signatures are almost a completely different topic. I'd be glad to go into more detail elsewhere, but suffice it to say there are specific reasons for much of the design concept around them. But the short hand version is simply allowing our members a chance to show off their character and ship, while keeping their vital statistics in clear view.
On the subject of screen resolutions, research through Google analytics has suggested that the largest percentage of users hold a screen resolution of 1680x1050. With screens becoming more affordable, and again your demographic being that which will be far more likely to buy higher resolution screens (than say again your online casual shopper), you can afford yourself the luxury of a little extra horizontal and vertical detail.

- People have told me that i need to "get used to the site" but in my opinion shouldn't have to be that way. A well designed site should be easy to navigate upon launch. This is why we have entire departments dedicated to UI/UX design and development. The reason why there is commonality in web site designs and a consistency is because this layout is a tried and true method, tested and verified by thousands of IA professionals.

I absolutely agree with what you're saying, but then I don't believe there are one size fits all rules to design. I think you have to take the specifics of what you're trying to achieve and then design a site around that. There are always compromises, whether that be in style or function. While I'm happy to look at specific issues and work on compromises that work better, I think the website functions particularly well when you take all of the variables and limitations into account.
While the website may not be instantly obvious to all, and perhaps more especially to those who aren't particular Star Trek fans, I think given the response of the vast majority the design brief for the site, has been largely accomplished.

I appreciate the comments, and again if there are specific areas you'd like to discuss, taking into account the points I've raised, perhaps we can continue the discussion in private.
Cheers.

[Burtonshaw]

Thanks for taking my point into consideration Sharp, and i appreciate the work that the department is and has put into this.

Thanks again,
Burtonshaw

[Ninja]

My post was more to provide some rationalizations and factual basis on why people may see this particular site as difficult to navigate and read as well as to also provide some info about web standardization practices. Definitely a lot of this is due inherently to the LCARS design itself (which was never meant to be an actual UI just something that looked good ala "Okuda-grams"), and also in part to restrictions from vB. Certainly as soon as the decision to use LCARS as a website interface were made, most of the points regarding design consistency were/are basically thrown out the window. I have no specific objections to using LCARS as a website design, certainly as a ST fan i appreciate it. However, that doesn't make it an effective/good website interface -- again mainly because LCARS was never meant to serve as a real life working interface. So we sacrificed ease of navigation and usability for LCARS and a very authentic ST look and feel. Oh well, there's always adv/dis. Not a big deal IMO.

P.S. My point about caps was that by having caps for the text used on all the LCARS graphics it does strain the eye - but i understand that the font is inline with the LCARS template.

[Sharpkiller]

We've tweaked the font colours so everything is a duller blue colour now, hopefully this makes things easier to read. Let us know if this makes a difference.

[John Hathaway]

No worries there Ninja, just wanted you to be aware of the thinking process behind the development.
Guys let us know if the new font colour is easier on the eyes, myself and Sharp were OK with the off white used before so your feedback would be really useful. Cheers.

[Burtonshaw]

Thanks for the work guys, the new font colouring has made looking at the thread links easier, however i am still having problems with the white text on black background.

One thing i remember being taught for presentations is that yellow on black is easier to read, not sure if it would be possible to add an option so that only people who want it can have it.