Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   FediForum (fediforum@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:01 JST FediForum

   in reply to

   • Scott Jenson
   • E. Drake Kajioka
   • Julian Fietkau
   • Daniel Cook

   @scottjenson @julian @Danc @edk And then, on the piano, most of the buttons look the same! Who designed this???

   • Embed this notice
     Scott Jenson (scottjenson@social.coop)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:02 JST Scott Jenson

     in reply to

     • E. Drake Kajioka
     • Julian Fietkau
     • Daniel Cook

     @julian @Danc @edk
     I refer to this as the "Piano Design", where you have a button for every feature, it just takes A LOT of practice and effort to use it well.

     I totally agree that a UX can be too simple! But *most* products need to be approachable by a wide range of users, novice and experts. So they need to be simple to use at first. The trick is to provide the extensions for power users without also impacting novices. The cockpit example is clearly ONLY for experts.

   • Embed this notice
     Julian Fietkau (julian@fietkau.social)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:06 JST Julian Fietkau

     in reply to

     • Scott Jenson
     • E. Drake Kajioka
     • Daniel Cook

     @scottjenson @Danc @edk Their writing alludes to the responsibility of designers to foster capability growth instead of only aiming for the lowest common denominator, but stops short of making process suggestions.

     I brought up the parallels to game design to Kindsmüller then. Somewhere I've got slides connecting the Mohs et al. IUUI model to @Danc's layers of mastery (https://lostgarden.home.blog/2007/02/04/one-billion-buttons-please-should-we-build-features-for-experts-or-newbies/). But he mostly waved me off. The guy never could find any room for games in his conception of design. 😄

   • Embed this notice
     Julian Fietkau (julian@fietkau.social)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:10 JST Julian Fietkau

     in reply to

     • Scott Jenson
     • E. Drake Kajioka
     • Daniel Cook

     @scottjenson @Danc @edk Around 2006 some German HCI researchers investigated what makes an interactive system intuitive to use, concluding that it has more to do with familiarity (= ability to transfer existing domain knowledge into it) than simplicity. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/1784197.1784212

     One of the authors later taught HCI in Hamburg. It's where I picked up the notion that systems for professionals (of any kind) often look more like airplane cockpits than stove panels. Complex tasks beget complex tools.

   • Embed this notice
     Scott Jenson (scottjenson@social.coop)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:11 JST Scott Jenson

     in reply to

     • E. Drake Kajioka
     • Daniel Cook

     @Danc @edk Well, there is just so much 'unnecessary friction' out there that if you just try to remove it, you're at least heading in the right direction. I just don't think there are enough good examples of using friction positively. To be honest, I don't really have any good ones to cite! That's why I'm trying to politely hint that this should be written up so we can celebrate it more.

   • Embed this notice
     Daniel Cook (danc@mastodon.gamedev.place)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:12 JST Daniel Cook

     in reply to

     • Scott Jenson
     • E. Drake Kajioka

     @edk @scottjenson I was just reading a VC growth hacking thread where "every click loses half your audience"

     Admittedly that's onboarding focused. Still, the thinking infects the rest.

     Where does a UX make room and value for user mastery and craft? An inherently wild space. But that's where we get an amplification of a user's humanity.

   • Embed this notice
     E. Drake Kajioka (edk@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:13 JST E. Drake Kajioka

     in reply to

     • Scott Jenson
     • Daniel Cook

     @scottjenson @Danc Yep. You don't do everything with a knife. 😅

     I don't think they teach this in design schools, though, or at least I've never seen this concept in a portfolio presentation. It's taken for granted that less clicks = more retention = more $.

   • Embed this notice
     E. Drake Kajioka (edk@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:14 JST E. Drake Kajioka

     in reply to

     • Daniel Cook

     @Danc I still get great enjoyment out of explaining to #ux designers how a lot of game design is about making things difficult on purpose. Their eyes widen. 🤯

     I think it's actually the best contribution games make to the broader design field. Faster and more frictionless isn't always better. Our minds need things to slow down, need to grapple with misconception, to achieve transformation and deep satisfaction.

     I blame minimalism and reason-based valuesets.

     #GameDesign

   • Embed this notice
     Scott Jenson (scottjenson@social.coop)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:14 JST Scott Jenson

     in reply to

     • E. Drake Kajioka
     • Daniel Cook

     @edk
     Incompetence:
     Friction everywhere because I don't give a damn

     Competence:
     Things are frictionless because I do give a damn

     Galaxy brain:
     A mix of frictionless and friction

     Friction isn't the goal, it's how to use it.

     @Danc

   • Embed this notice
     Daniel Cook (danc@mastodon.gamedev.place)'s status on Friday, 09-Feb-2024 07:32:15 JST Daniel Cook

     I think about this a lot whenever a new platform comes out. The modern UX paradigm seems to be about reducing the toolset and cognitive load of input and expression to the point of mere billable consumption.

     Diversity and resilience comes from an ecosystem that embraces depth and flexibility.

     Yes, I'm looking at you, Apple. Ex: Fingers are not the peak of human tool usage unless you are a toddler.

     https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@mhoye@mastodon.social/111890843048277464