First OOTP 11 Screenshots!

[Tony M]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

Based on the poll I posted, the ½ / .5 thing should be optional too.

Nope. There should be an option to make the ½ / .5 thing option optional.

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

HTML reports still have the alternating color in tables.

Regarding the other screens, I will consider making it an option.

Your product is so damned cool. It cracks me up we are arguing over such minor details.

If it wasn;t an option, I would say a good comrpromise to make, would be to have the alternating background colors just slightly different, almost transparent-like.

For instance, if the main background color is just pure white, the alternating gray values can be something like even 5% gray.

But if you can make it an option, I would be ALL for that!

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Much better, yes. Isn't it interesting how small changes can have a large effect on the look of something?

If I am being really nitpicky (and I am when it comes to typography/design items—sorry can't help myself!), I might add just a touch more space. Either that, or add a highlight behind the header rows. It doesn't have to be a strong colour, even just a subtle shading can work wonders.


Only one thing 'wrong' in your mockup: the GB shouldn't be right aligned including the ½; the ½ ought to be in a 'column' of its own. Like this:

01
02½
10
13½

I expect this can't be done with normal column alignment commands, which are usually just left, centre, right, and decimal point. It could be done by giving the ½ part of the GB its own column. The whole number GB is right aligned; the ½ column is immediately to the right of it, but is blank unless the GB ends in a half, in which case the ½ is displayed in the column.

Isn't there a command, in whatever programming language that MArkus uses that can align numbers according to decimal places?

Now, since it is using ASCI 1/2, I doubt that would work. You're workaround to that problem makes the most sense.

[phenom]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Like this?

Okay, I changed my mind. That looks pretty effing sweet. And I'm not just brown-nosing here.

btw, will OOTP 11 have pie? I liek pie.

[phenom]

also, what's the idea with the G column? Is that some kind of standard reporting for those of us who can't add?

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by phenom

Okay, I changed my mind. That looks pretty effing sweet. And I'm not just brown-nosing here.

btw, will OOTP 11 have pie? I liek pie.

You could probably make a fictional baseball league where each type of pie competes against each other! That would be fun. I vote for Lemon marangue!

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by phenom

also, what's the idea with the G column? Is that some kind of standard reporting for those of us who can't add?

meh. Why not have it? I think it's standard on most ranking sheets anyway.

[phenom]

Is it? I don't know, that's why I ask.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by phenom

also, what's the idea with the G column? Is that some kind of standard reporting for those of us who can't add?

I think it's relevant to compare how many games teams have played. Yeah, baseball more works on a GB system than say hockey's point system, but even with baseball I think there can be something to be gained out of quickly seeing if one team has played more or less games than another.

And adding 25 to 12 might not be a problem for most, but what about 89 + 57? It only takes me a second or two, but is that true for most people?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Nihilianth

meh. Why not have it? I think it's standard on most ranking sheets anyway.

It really isn't needed for standings purposes IMO. I'd personally get rid of it and space out the columns a bit more. Not a big issue though.

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

It really isn't needed for standings purposes IMO. I'd personally get rid of it and space out the columns a bit more. Not a big issue though.

It isn;t a big issue. And I am totally amazed that we are even talking about such a minor issue. That showing just how great this game is, of course.

But I'll look in my local paper, the pro hockey section has a GP (Games Played.)

I will have to wait for baseball to actually start to confirm whether the G column is standard in my local paper for baseball. I am almost 100% certain is it is standard in most standings.

[bailey]

I don't think pre-AS and post-AS is particularly useful. What I would like to see is my record vs. each team. And what I would really like to see is a customizable standings screen, like you can have at MLB.com.

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by bailey

I don't think pre-AS and post-AS is particularly useful. What I would like to see is my record vs. each team. And what I would really like to see is a customizable standings screen, like you can have at MLB.com.

This may sound like a dumb qquestion, but what IS pre and post AS?

Also, the record vs each team is already in the game. It's on a different screen that you have to navigate through from your manager home page.

[pstrickert]

I think pre-AS and post-AS is a nice addition (especially since we're talking about the "expanded" standings option).

[pstrickert]

pre-All Star Game and post-All Star Game.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Nihilianth

And I am totally amazed that we are even talking about such a minor issue.

Well, for me, design and aesthetic issues are never minor. Which is why I commented in the first place!

Originally Posted by bailey

I don't think pre-AS and post-AS is particularly useful.

That actually raises an interesting question: what happens if the league has no All-Star Game?

Originally Posted by bailey

And what I would really like to see is a customizable standings screen, like you can have at MLB.com.

I proposed something very similar to that. What has been added, it seems, is not that far off from that. We'll have to wait to see some of the details though.

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by pstrickert

pre-All Star Game and post-All Star Game.

ok. Thanks.

I only see that as being necessary for those leagues with split-season formats then.

[Vinny P.]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Well, for me, design and aesthetic issues are never minor. Which is why I commented in the first place!

I feel the same way, but sometimes you have to sacrifice a bit of aesthetics in order to get the game on the shelves, so to speak, on time. You can sit here all day everyday worrying about tiny minor aspects like that without dealing with larger issues.

Believe me, I know quite a bit about typography myself. I know how you feel. And i feel the same way. It seems as though there is just simply TOO much data just for the standings screen. But personally, I feel as though all the data that is there is practical.

And that's another thing. Sometimes you have to sacrifice some good design concepts for practicality. It then becomes a matter of "form over function," or vice-versa, depending on your personal preference.

[Cooleyvol]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Well, I disagree I prefer less changing backgrounds... it makes the whole screen easier on the eyes IMO.

Alternating backgrounds for each row on the standings page would be much better, despite what you like.

[pstrickert]

Originally Posted by Nihilianth

ok. Thanks.

I only see that as being necessary for those leagues with split-season formats then.

I think it's fairly common to hear broadcasters refer to "the hottest team in baseball since the All Star break" or "the second-best record in the second half of the season." I wouldn't mind being able to compare pre-AS and post-AS stats for each player.