Basic Standards


It would be sort of nice to have standards but it will be very difficult to achieve:

1. Different people have different opinions about what makes sense. For example, I think that requiring three buttons to be pressed simultaneously to do ANYTHING is a really bad choice. Even requiring two buttons at once except for very complicated applications is usually better handled with a menu of some kind. Other people feel differently. Given that there is no widely-used standard already nobody wants to use a new standard that they think is dumb.

2. Other consoles and operating systems have not been particularly consistent with the use of their buttons and symbols, so making a scheme that is natural for everybody's past experience is impossible. For example, to me 'X' means close or cancel because that is how it is used in the devices I use most. But apparently other devices use 'X' for select. For emulators, it makes sense to me to try to map the controls as closely as possible to the controls of the emulated system's controller (when possible).

3. People are ornery and unwilling to do things just because some guy on the internet said they should. So when somebody makes a proclamation about "here is how you should do things" the natural reaction is to say "who made you god?" instead of following along. GPH could make such a proclamation and make sure it applies to any games published using the gp2x logo. That might gradually drag the homebrew crowd along, but I doubt they will.

4. Different games and applications simply have different needs. It's fine to talk of "primary action", "secondary action" and "menu", but what about a fighting game where there's a dozen different actions, or a strategy game that needs complicated selection mechanisms or a game that needs six different menus? For consoles there is probably a lot of thought that goes into this and everything probably funnels through a central "interface police" who attempt to make things as consistent as possible while taking the needs of a game into account.

I expect the upcoming Community Game Contest will have 20 or more decent games. The organizers of that could proclaim that a particular set of interface guidelines need to be followed to enter, though it would be risky (because disqualifying good games on those grounds will be tough to do and people who hate the standard chosen might just quit) and it might be too late now anyway.

To me it's natural that START should start the game, and then since its functionality has already become associated with "game control" that pressing it in game should pause the game, producing a menu where pressing START again will restart it (and other options are available). However, other people think that having START pause the game is not natural (though there is no button labeled PAUSE). I doubt I'll convince them and I doubt they'll convince me.
 
Pressing 'start' and 'select' at the same time seems to be the best choice for accessing an emulator menu, or for the unsophisticated emu -- exiting. It's not a combination used in any games that I'm aware of. Plus, it's already used for exiting the built in apps.

Next best would be a combination that starts with clicking down on the joystick, but I can see the complaints of people that may eventually go with the d-pad mod.

The absolute worst is just pressing 'start' or pressing the left and right shoulder buttons, since these are all used for in-game functions and it's *extremely* easy to accidentally hit both shoulder buttons at the same time while playing a game that uses them.

Consistent controls for emulator functions would make the GP2X infinitely more professional. I can't even count the number of times I've just turned it off because I couldn't remember what key combo a particular emu used for exiting/accessing the menu, or how many times I've accidentally triggered some other function while trying to figure it out. (I have about 1000 stella rom save states to prove it :) )
 
True, if an emulator or emulated game needs a particular control for a particular purpose (be it START or X or anything else), using that button for another purpose is probably not smart.

As a person who doesn't care about emulators I am not really very willing to avoid the use of START, X, A, or any other key in gp2x native games or apps just because that key has some meaning in some emulated system though.
 
o0o0o posted on Aug 15 2006 at 04:23 PM said:
Next best would be a combination that starts with clicking down on the joystick, but I can see the complaints of people that may eventually go with the d-pad mod.

The absolute worst is just pressing 'start' or pressing the left and right shoulder buttons, since these are all used for in-game functions and it's *extremely* easy to accidentally hit both shoulder buttons at the same time while playing a game that uses them.

The stick push should be avoided. Not just because of the d-pads (although another good reason) but also it wears the stick faster. That center switch is also the pivot point for the stick. When this switch wears in the stick shaft drops and causes jamming. It is best to avoid that center switch altogether.

Using the shoulder buttons and "start" or "select" at the same time, rather than shoulder buttons and center stick press at the same time is a much better solution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Epicenter posted on Aug 14 2006 at 10:02 PM said:
This whole 'hit start to close the program' but is fucking with my head a good bit. The GP2X feels just like my old black Japanese GBA; and start .. well, started games or paused them! Now, I keep hitting it to invoke something and instead the program closes! It's become second-nature to me, like Ctrl+C/V, Alt-Tab... it's hard to UNlearn after all these years! After all, I used Start for that function back to when I was barely able to walk and playing NES games. :p

People like you are why the XBox 360 renamed 'Select' to 'Back' :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
iignotus posted on Aug 15 2006 at 07:04 AM said:
I like the idea, personally, and I've always stuck with the PSX configuration in games. It also makes sense with a key setup like the gp2x's. Y for menu/options, X for continue/accept/advance, A for the main function, and B for the secondary function/run/repeat-button. Many PSX/PS2 games adhere to that style, especially older ones.

And the PS went against everything I knew as a avid SNES gamer because I was required to press the bottom button to select something.

It still drives me mad when I play the playstation with someone (I don't own one.), because on the SNES 'A' was select ('B' on 2x) and 'B' ('X' on the 2x) was cancel, so I always select something when I want to cancel something on a menu (or vica versa).

It just goes to show that plenty of people are used to different things and to conform to one standard would alienate the others.

I think that remembering a couple of button presses for a couple different games isn't all that bad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Button combinations wouldn't really be a problem if all applications used menus, thing is, a lot don't - and those that do all differ so much from each other that it (to me at least) the GP2X look a bit messy, or you know, un-planned. If menus were simple like HU6280's menu, and not overly flashy and branded like DrMDx (emulation is great though, don't get me wrong) then it would really help make the whole scene a lot more organised visually. By branding, I mean like putting the name of the creator in gigantic letters at the top of the menu or something - "like this? donate here!" and such. I don't like how, for example, SquidgeSNES and DrMDx look totally different, I lose myself in the menus sometimes.

It's an incredibly strict idea, but I have strange preferences to things.
 
Dzz posted on Aug 15 2006 at 09:39 AM said:
As a person who doesn't care about emulators I am not really very willing to avoid the use of START, X, A, or any other key in gp2x native games or apps just because that key has some meaning in some emulated system though.

It's not about in game key-bindings per se.

It's about standards for Exit and Application Menu key-bindings. If you want people to understand how to use your application, you have to follow a set of conventions. Unfortunately right now there are no conventions, which makes the situation all the more dire.

Imagine if a windows (or mac or linux) based application had a different placement of the close window button, and you eventually just had to reboot the machine because you couldn't find it. It would drive you insane, and at the very least think that the program was written poorly. Now imagine if that was *every* program on the OS.

Even on a *nix shell, you can generally feel confident that "control-c" will exit you out of whatever you're current running.

Not developing and adhering to standards for something as basic as Exit/Close is only going to serve in lowering the quality of the GP2X as a whole.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
from what I've seen so far, there is a convention in the shell. the default gp2x shell menu shortcut is to press start to return to the main menu. however this is perhaps not the best choice for an in game menu shortcut, I found squidgesnes' approach of holding down select quite rewarding UI logic.

what I'm trying to say is I guess, shouldn't the in game UI conventions adher to the devices physical UI as closely as possible for ease of use? of course you can break this convention completely if you can actually *see* the interface.
 
o0o0o posted on Aug 15 2006 at 02:13 PM said:
Not developing and adhering to standards for something as basic as Exit/Close is only going to serve in lowering the quality of the GP2X as a whole.
Sure, I'll buy that. As for what to do about it, that's the question.

I know that I certainly am NOT going to make my next program use L+R+STICK+B or whatever to bring up the menu just because somebody proclaimed it a standard. Unless my users are all used to such a weird thing they'll never guess it. So when they are used to doing that because most apps do that I'll switch to it. Until then, press START to get a menu of options, one of which is "resume" and one of which is "quit". It's the best I can do for giving them something they are likely to guess (having just pressed START to start the game) since they are not used to any other convention. When feasible, all the commands will be shown on the screen, but that isn't always possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
otakuL posted on Aug 15 2006 at 03:35 PM said:
from what I've seen so far, there is a convention in the shell. the default gp2x shell menu shortcut is to press start to return to the main menu. however this is perhaps not the best choice for an in game menu shortcut, I found squidgesnes' approach of holding down select quite rewarding UI logic.

what I'm trying to say is I guess, shouldn't the in game UI conventions adher to the devices physical UI as closely as possible for ease of use? of course you can break this convention completely if you can actually *see* the interface.

It's not a physical UI; it's just a program we can easily replace and many people are working on doing. the new GMenu is a real step in the right direction. Do you really want to base a standard around a menu that's a terrible, slow piece of shit like the one that comes with the machine? It has the most chaotic and random button configurations I've ever seen; Explorer is a testament to this. The arcane selections here are unbelievable; the button to execute your chosen action (picked with *Y*?!!) is changed from the usual 'A' to *B*. What kind of logic is that? And Select checks boxes instead of picking a mode? That's otherworldly.

If the GUI was Korean would our programs be?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lol

it is rather shit isn't it? I just tried to delete something with the explorer and had a bit of a confused moment.

I'm such a noob. I'll keep it shut until I've had more time with it. ;)
 
I used the word recommendations to avoid this irrational 'boss of me' reaction that people get at times. Its just not a good reason to not do something because someone suggests it. Its not as if you're going to have to send your program for Quallity Testing, or pay a fee for publishing.

Emulators though, theyre kind of bound by their own rules arent they? They're beyond what I was thinking about. Its original stuff I had in mind, where you're not going to ever be torn between an interface and the integrity of the game.

I cant get onto the wiki right now, and a search turned up 1 related result :p
 
Dzz posted on Aug 15 2006 at 09:50 PM said:
o0o0o posted on Aug 15 2006 at 02:13 PM said:
Not developing and adhering to standards for something as basic as Exit/Close is only going to serve in lowering the quality of the GP2X as a whole.
Sure, I'll buy that. As for what to do about it, that's the question.

I know that I certainly am NOT going to make my next program use L+R+STICK+B or whatever to bring up the menu just because somebody proclaimed it a standard. Unless my users are all used to such a weird thing they'll never guess it. So when they are used to doing that because most apps do that I'll switch to it. Until then, press START to get a menu of options, one of which is "resume" and one of which is "quit". It's the best I can do for giving them something they are likely to guess (having just pressed START to start the game) since they are not used to any other convention. When feasible, all the commands will be shown on the screen, but that isn't always possible.

I agree, and I think I will go with the 'Start -> menu' solution. It means I don't need a pause button anymore, I can just 'pause with options' =D Where all the buttons are required (eg. emulator) I think that we should use something like 'Start & Select' held for 2 secs. And TELL the user about this while the emulator is loading.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top