And just for clarification, are u guys saying that when it stated damage from an encounter was 687,765 (for instance), that it was not actually that number? When the number was so specific down to the last digit? How does that work then? Where did the number come from? Because there was a comment above which said it was not correct.
"btw, I was accurate in what I've wrote floaters are to get a rough idea what happens, you want accurate use the logs"
Seeing the number 687765 (because they didn't have commas even) could either be you did a hit for 687765, or have two different hits of 687 and 765. Also, if you did two at will attacks you could see the sum of those two hits and think it was a single attack. In both of these cases, your log would show what really happened and your dummy hits could have told you that you were better than you actually were.
If a messy house is fine for a parent, they've been fine with it for 10 years, but their child decides that they want it to be more organized and presentable, shouldn't that child be allowed to organize it at no extra work to the parent? All we are talking about is the appearance of damage floaters and making it more readible, why are you so upset over it?
They're not more readable now than before. They're actually harder to read because they tell you even less than they did before. You look at it and now have to do extra mental gymnastics to work out what's going on whereas before it was just spelt out for you intuitively, u saw the amount of digits and knew just by glancing at it in one split second what the figure was. And as I said above in another reply to you, taking off a couple of digits and adding an m or k is not going to make it less messy, they will still display in the same way over the top of each other if that is your worry and what you're trying to get rid of.
Ok, but that's your opinion. I think it is easier to read now. I'm not sure what mental gymnastics you are talking about, I see 687765 and 687.76k as similar numbers, and if I cared about the exta .005k, I could read it in the log. So far, it's mainly just been you that has voiced the fact that you prefer how it used to be. (others voiced that they want K to be k, which is another thing).
You see 6 digits and you automatically know it's 100's of thousands. 4 and it's thousands. You see 7 and you know it's over a million. It is instant. And hard-wired for the players. Not so to read a specific letter and translate it. You now have to focus on the actual letter on the end, seek it out while you're doing other things and find that one single digit which is moving around and physically read it and process what letter it is and then translate that in your head to the meaning, not instantly visually scan a string of digits in one single move and do an estimate on how many there are as to what ballpark you're in.
Reading numbers and numbers with letters at the end takes the same amount of time for most people. Adding commas certainly does make things easier as it's a visual separator, the same with decimal points. I think the capital K should be a lower case, as it follows SI, but I can adapt to a capital K just fine (with grumbles sure).
Wow, you two really have been triggered, huh. You don't seem to like your positions in the Dev's ears being challenged at all, do u. I've never seen people respond so quickly or profusely, it kind of gives the game away as to how triggered you both are. Listen, I'm not into to-and-fro slanging-matches, so I'm not responding any further to either of you on this topic. I've already made my position perfectly clear explaining why I firmly believe this change is for the worse, I think I've explained it in great detail by now (unlike the Devs who can't be bothered to explain properly why they actually did it) and how it is in no way an improvement on how things were and I speak for others who hold the same view also. And it's our right to express it. So pull ur panties out of ur cracks and go and play the game and enjoy ur new damage floaters you worked so hard to get which I personally have less interest looking at than ever before, which is what I said in the first place.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
0
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
Wow, you two really have been triggered, huh. You don't seem to like your positions in the Dev's ears being challenged at all, do u. I've never seen people respond so quickly or profusely, it kind of gives the game away as to how triggered you both are. Listen, I'm not into to-and-fro slanging-matches, so I'm not responding any further to either of you on this topic. I've already made my position perfectly clear explaining why I firmly believe this change is for the worse, I think I've explained it in great detail by now (unlike the Devs who can't be bothered to explain properly why they actually did it) and how it is in no way an improvement on how things were and I speak for others who hold the same view also. And it's our right to express it. So pull ur panties out of ur cracks and go and play the game and enjoy ur new damage floaters you worked so hard to get which I personally have less interest looking at than ever before, which is what I said in the first place.
Again going with a tone and personal attack? Still waiting for that example of Dev's ear, or that imaginary position. Or where we "worked so hard" to get those floaters.
Currently there is only one person in the thread trying to change the game into their way, and claims to represent others. I wonder who that is?
0
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
edited July 2023
How passive aggressive. I thought you said you wouldn't react anymore.
Still waiting for you to enlighten how we have a special position, Dev's ears, how you challenged it, or how we worked hard to get floaters or anything.. It's not obvious to the rest of us, so please do educate us. Then perhaps we can "pull ur panties out of ur cracks". Though I'm fascinated by your fascination of my crack and panties.
PS: it's "your" not "ur".
0
plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,410Arc User
Also, maybe read all the dev posts for stuff? It's not their fault that you don't read them until something goes live, there is a whole section on top of the forums that highlights when they make posts even!
That's a bit rich! If you had read the threads on the preview feedback forum you would have seen the same people asking the same questions and expressing the same concerns and getting no response or reassurance. So, the dev posts were read and were responded to, on the preview feedback forum while feedback was being requested.
This thread is because it went live in that state... but at least now it is live we can explore it in its released state, and provide feedback here, in the player feedback forum.
It's obvious to many that damage floaters do not affect damage logs. It's a question that anyone with experience with the game, ESPECIALLY if they don't deal with ACT, would know. You have a combat chat tab, that's the log. These concerns and questions were likely ignored due to how elementary or clueless the player seems or not considered serious. Also, some questions were answered in the very first post before the questions were even asked.
Please link me to where it was clearly explained the justification to changing the floaters in the first place.
The only thing it says to explain is: "Our ultimate goal with these changes were to improve combat text readability." But it doesn't provide any explanation on what was wrong with it for 10 years and why anyone had an issue with it, ie; what exactly was the issue, enough that it warranted changing. So there is really no justification given other than they apparently wanted to get their fingers into it and tweak it for the sake of it.
That is your opinion. You asked "where it was clearly explained the justification". For me, they clearly explained the justification which I am not saying I agree or not because it is a matter of opinion.
If you mean to ask "where it was clearly explained the justification that would satisfy you", then I would not respond because I am not you. I can only reply with something that would satisfy me.
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
Also, maybe read all the dev posts for stuff? It's not their fault that you don't read them until something goes live, there is a whole section on top of the forums that highlights when they make posts even!
That's a bit rich! If you had read the threads on the preview feedback forum you would have seen the same people asking the same questions and expressing the same concerns and getting no response or reassurance. So, the dev posts were read and were responded to, on the preview feedback forum while feedback was being requested.
This thread is because it went live in that state... but at least now it is live we can explore it in its released state, and provide feedback here, in the player feedback forum.
It's obvious to many that damage floaters do not affect damage logs. It's a question that anyone with experience with the game, ESPECIALLY if they don't deal with ACT, would know. You have a combat chat tab, that's the log. These concerns and questions were likely ignored due to how elementary or clueless the player seems or not considered serious. Also, some questions were answered in the very first post before the questions were even asked.
Please link me to where it was clearly explained the justification to changing the floaters in the first place.
The only thing it says to explain is: "Our ultimate goal with these changes were to improve combat text readability." But it doesn't provide any explanation on what was wrong with it for 10 years and why anyone had an issue with it, ie; what exactly was the issue, enough that it warranted changing. So there is really no justification given other than they apparently wanted to get their fingers into it and tweak it for the sake of it.
That is your opinion. You asked "where it was clearly explained the justification". For me, they clearly explained the justification which I am not saying I agree or not because it is a matter of opinion.
If you mean to ask "where it was clearly explained the justification that would satisfy you", then I would not respond because I am not you. I can only reply with something that would satisfy me.
"improving" it (all they said) doesn't explain anything at all. What is the reason for improving it, as in what was wrong with it before to justify changing it and disturbing something the players have been used to for 10 years.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
I mean they have done some very good changes as in the bag/inventory sorting improvement, that's awesome, not all things they do are bad, I can think of quite a few changes over recent years which are good, but there are also loads and loads of things they spend time on changing which are not in need of improvement and seem more to just keep them in work and busy than anything else. I often notice little changes to old maps they have made, adding props which were never there before in Icewind Dale of all places, deleting the flags from Icespire peak, and so on. If it affects the players (and I'm one of them) and I think it's not a necessary change, I'm sure going to say so. I support the game improving over time if it makes it better, but a lot of things are just changes for the sake of change (like I believe this damage floater thing to be) and if all it's going to do is slowly erode the tone and personality of the game away for no good reason, it should be called-out.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
0
plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,410Arc User
Also, maybe read all the dev posts for stuff? It's not their fault that you don't read them until something goes live, there is a whole section on top of the forums that highlights when they make posts even!
That's a bit rich! If you had read the threads on the preview feedback forum you would have seen the same people asking the same questions and expressing the same concerns and getting no response or reassurance. So, the dev posts were read and were responded to, on the preview feedback forum while feedback was being requested.
This thread is because it went live in that state... but at least now it is live we can explore it in its released state, and provide feedback here, in the player feedback forum.
It's obvious to many that damage floaters do not affect damage logs. It's a question that anyone with experience with the game, ESPECIALLY if they don't deal with ACT, would know. You have a combat chat tab, that's the log. These concerns and questions were likely ignored due to how elementary or clueless the player seems or not considered serious. Also, some questions were answered in the very first post before the questions were even asked.
Please link me to where it was clearly explained the justification to changing the floaters in the first place.
The only thing it says to explain is: "Our ultimate goal with these changes were to improve combat text readability." But it doesn't provide any explanation on what was wrong with it for 10 years and why anyone had an issue with it, ie; what exactly was the issue, enough that it warranted changing. So there is really no justification given other than they apparently wanted to get their fingers into it and tweak it for the sake of it.
That is your opinion. You asked "where it was clearly explained the justification". For me, they clearly explained the justification which I am not saying I agree or not because it is a matter of opinion.
If you mean to ask "where it was clearly explained the justification that would satisfy you", then I would not respond because I am not you. I can only reply with something that would satisfy me.
"improving" it (all they said) doesn't explain anything at all. What is the reason for improving it, as in what was wrong with it before to justify changing it and disturbing something the players have been used to for 10 years.
That is your opinion and clearly it does not satisfy you. In terms of my opinion, it satisfied me.
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
Also, maybe read all the dev posts for stuff? It's not their fault that you don't read them until something goes live, there is a whole section on top of the forums that highlights when they make posts even!
That's a bit rich! If you had read the threads on the preview feedback forum you would have seen the same people asking the same questions and expressing the same concerns and getting no response or reassurance. So, the dev posts were read and were responded to, on the preview feedback forum while feedback was being requested.
This thread is because it went live in that state... but at least now it is live we can explore it in its released state, and provide feedback here, in the player feedback forum.
It's obvious to many that damage floaters do not affect damage logs. It's a question that anyone with experience with the game, ESPECIALLY if they don't deal with ACT, would know. You have a combat chat tab, that's the log. These concerns and questions were likely ignored due to how elementary or clueless the player seems or not considered serious. Also, some questions were answered in the very first post before the questions were even asked.
Please link me to where it was clearly explained the justification to changing the floaters in the first place.
The only thing it says to explain is: "Our ultimate goal with these changes were to improve combat text readability." But it doesn't provide any explanation on what was wrong with it for 10 years and why anyone had an issue with it, ie; what exactly was the issue, enough that it warranted changing. So there is really no justification given other than they apparently wanted to get their fingers into it and tweak it for the sake of it.
That is your opinion. You asked "where it was clearly explained the justification". For me, they clearly explained the justification which I am not saying I agree or not because it is a matter of opinion.
If you mean to ask "where it was clearly explained the justification that would satisfy you", then I would not respond because I am not you. I can only reply with something that would satisfy me.
"improving" it (all they said) doesn't explain anything at all. What is the reason for improving it, as in what was wrong with it before to justify changing it and disturbing something the players have been used to for 10 years.
That is your opinion and clearly it does not satisfy you. In terms of my opinion, it satisfied me.
I'm happy for u.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
I think the first set of floater changes were great. We got a cleaner looking font and the sources of information were organised into quadrants and it looked much tidier to me.
With the most recent changes, I think having two decimal places of precision for a lower value hit (in the thousands) is adding clutter back in. I wonder if it's possible to show less precision (one decimal place, or even none) for the k hits compared to the M hits, so the k hits would have shorter strings again. Put another way, if M hits show damage to the nearest 10000 there is no need for k hits to show it to the nearest 10.
I appreciate the point that two hits floating next to each other can look like one larger number, and the suffixes do address that.
0
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
I think the first set of floater changes were great. We got a cleaner looking font and the sources of information were organised into quadrants and it looked much tidier to me.
With the most recent changes, I think having two decimal places of precision for a lower value hit (in the thousands) is adding clutter back in. I wonder if it's possible to show less precision (one decimal place, or even none) for the k hits compared to the M hits, so the k hits would have shorter strings again. Put another way, if M hits show damage to the nearest 10000 there is no need for k hits to show it to the nearest 10.
I appreciate the point that two hits floating next to each other can look like one larger number, and the suffixes do address that.
I was running some quests in the new map earlier today and it's just a mess of numbers which don't mean anything to me so I'm looking at them less than ever. Every single number is the same length and when you look at them out of the corner of your eye (which u do when ur focused on the enemies and not getting bashed, u just glance at them very fast or out of ur peripheral vision) they all look the same now. The length of them is what allowed me to know what ballpark they were in, 100k or 1k or 1m according to how long and how many digits they had which u could see by glancing really fast. It's a hard-wired human spacial thing. Now they're all the same length and the only difference is the letter on the end, they all look the same and I'm now forced to stop looking at what I am looking at and look directly at a moving number and search for the letter right on the end, one single digit in a sea of others and it's moving at the same time, to see what the value is. It takes far more concentration and focus to do and it's made it more complicated to read. I really wish they would just put the numbers back the way they were, it's not at all user friendly now. Just a mass of numbers all looking the same length as each other which require extra time to read and forcing u to look away longer from what's important in combat.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
1
plasticbatMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 12,410Arc User
edited July 2023
Since I play more and pay more attention to the floater now, I am getting used to the new format now. Old format was not good and had its own downfall but after years of 'training my eyes' I got used to that. The new format is not perfect but now I consider it is better because I start to get a hand on what I should look for.
I like the separation of different type of numbers. The issue of the length of number can be resolved with nnn.nn[kM]. i.e. 23.30k instead of 23.3k. 1.00M instead of 1M.
It will even be better to give different shade of number for less than 1k, k and M. e.g. different shade of orange (for critical hit) for less than 1k (light orange), k (orange) and M (dark orange).
No, I don't want to go back to old format. I prefer to "improve" the new style.
By the way, besides lowercase k is the standard, it is better to the eyes too; in my opinion, of course.
Post edited by plasticbat on
*** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
I do agree that the idea of different shades of the same colour to denote values would be helpful and it did in fact cross my mind yesterday. I support anything which allows u to glance at them and know as fast as possible what it means. This I was able to do with the length of them before and it's a step backward in that regard now. But the colours/shade thing warrants some investigation imo.
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
There is the size of the text as well, and I was never sure what that meant. Sometimes you would get a large in pixels number that wasn't very large in magnitude. Maybe the M hits could be in a bigger size as well as different shade? Reduced precision for the k hits would shorten their strings too... the more "at a glance" cues the better.
Yea, I'm looking at them now while doing dig sites and it's a major fail. They're all more or less the same length and all look the same at a glance and who has time to work out where a decimal point is. Here's two numbers, one is 5,730, the other is 108,000 and they both look the flippin' same when they're floating up fast.
And someone tell me how this change makes them any clearer to read anyway...
Apparently pointing-out the bleeding obvious is a 'personal attack'.
Comments
Wow, you two really have been triggered, huh. You don't seem to like your positions in the Dev's ears being challenged at all, do u. I've never seen people respond so quickly or profusely, it kind of gives the game away as to how triggered you both are. Listen, I'm not into to-and-fro slanging-matches, so I'm not responding any further to either of you on this topic. I've already made my position perfectly clear explaining why I firmly believe this change is for the worse, I think I've explained it in great detail by now (unlike the Devs who can't be bothered to explain properly why they actually did it) and how it is in no way an improvement on how things were and I speak for others who hold the same view also. And it's our right to express it. So pull ur panties out of ur cracks and go and play the game and enjoy ur new damage floaters you worked so hard to get which I personally have less interest looking at than ever before, which is what I said in the first place.
Still waiting for that example of Dev's ear, or that imaginary position. Or where we "worked so hard" to get those floaters.
Currently there is only one person in the thread trying to change the game into their way, and claims to represent others. I wonder who that is?
How passive aggressive. I thought you said you wouldn't react anymore.
Still waiting for you to enlighten how we have a special position, Dev's ears, how you challenged it, or how we worked hard to get floaters or anything.. It's not obvious to the rest of us, so please do educate us.
Then perhaps we can "pull ur panties out of ur cracks". Though I'm fascinated by your fascination of my crack and panties.
PS: it's "your" not "ur".
If you mean to ask "where it was clearly explained the justification that would satisfy you", then I would not respond because I am not you. I can only reply with something that would satisfy me.
With the most recent changes, I think having two decimal places of precision for a lower value hit (in the thousands) is adding clutter back in.
I wonder if it's possible to show less precision (one decimal place, or even none) for the k hits compared to the M hits, so the k hits would have shorter strings again. Put another way, if M hits show damage to the nearest 10000 there is no need for k hits to show it to the nearest 10.
I appreciate the point that two hits floating next to each other can look like one larger number, and the suffixes do address that.
Here from a random video or a run:
Look carefully at the 5266 damage floater
Now there is another proc of 2633
And we get 5266+2633 = 7899
The initial 5266 was also a sum of 2633 + 2633.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not to the quoted part:
For those that do not see the bleeding obvious, I wonder how they see anything with this numbers soup:
I like the separation of different type of numbers. The issue of the length of number can be resolved with nnn.nn[kM].
i.e.
23.30k instead of 23.3k.
1.00M instead of 1M.
It will even be better to give different shade of number for less than 1k, k and M.
e.g. different shade of orange (for critical hit) for less than 1k (light orange), k (orange) and M (dark orange).
No, I don't want to go back to old format. I prefer to "improve" the new style.
By the way, besides lowercase k is the standard, it is better to the eyes too; in my opinion, of course.
Yea, I'm looking at them now while doing dig sites and it's a major fail. They're all more or less the same length and all look the same at a glance and who has time to work out where a decimal point is.
Here's two numbers, one is 5,730, the other is 108,000 and they both look the flippin' same when they're floating up fast.
And someone tell me how this change makes them any clearer to read anyway...
And if they're in the hundreds of thousands they still look the same as that as well.