Greetings all.  I've browsed these forums on and off for years now and I'm getting ready to release the site for my RPG.  I'm interested in some input on the layout of my current web site.  I tossed the site together Saturday night and I've been drilling away on all of my on-line tools for release.

http://www.3d-rpg.com

Keep in mind that there is very little content.  What I would like to know is if the page displays fine (if not what browser you're using), does it look good, and what would be the first thing you would change / improve. Your thoughts and comments are welcome, and I thank you for your time!

I'm busy with work, so no long post from me for now. Quick thoughts:

Shows fine.

Busy front page, not good. Nowadays I recommend not having news feeds and such on the front page if you want walk-in audience. Text masses don't bother repeat visitors who have a reason to be there, but they'll look negative to a casual browser. It's probably smarter to be very to-the-point in any material intended for casual browsers: say what you have to say directly and with few words. Save the long texts for your fans who are already committed to being interested.

The style reminds me of superhero comics for some reason. Probably the blue color palette and the background grid.

The Flash thing could be annoying for literary-oriented folks like myself who do not favor gratuitous flash. I suspect that the site could be better off without it.

But, now I need to get back to work. Have fun with your site design.

Eero wrote:
I'm busy with work, so no long post from me for now. Quick thoughts:

Shows fine.

Busy front page, not good. Nowadays I recommend not having news feeds and such on the front page if you want walk-in audience. Text masses don't bother repeat visitors who have a reason to be there, but they'll look negative to a casual browser. It's probably smarter to be very to-the-point in any material intended for casual browsers: say what you have to say directly and with few words. Save the long texts for your fans who are already committed to being interested.

The style reminds me of superhero comics for some reason. Probably the blue color palette and the background grid.

The Flash thing could be annoying for literary-oriented folks like myself who do not favor gratuitous flash. I suspect that the site could be better off without it.

But, now I need to get back to work. Have fun with your site design.

Still busy, still terse; I could get used to this.

Flash is not a problem per se, it loads nicely and all. It's just that the way it can and must be used in advertising comes off as cheap and frivolous to certain segments - I know this because I'm one of those people myself. The best you can achieve with Flash is to depict yourself as a desirable advertisement spot by having somebody else's flash advertisements. The second-best message (for me, understand) is that you're a clueless big corp that has too much money to spend on consultants. The worst segment of internet denizens that uses Flash, however, are the plucky-yet-clueless small companies that want to seem all professional and eye-candied - I see this all the time when a small start-up company puts up a multimedia website navigated through Flash animation.

For what it's worth, I found the contents of your Flash a bit entertaining as well, nothing wrong with that in particular. It's just the medium that carries a bit of stigma from being associated with too many tackily commercial money-grabs and clueless large corporations. Even that is not a problem if you don't mind the impression - you never should try to make all audience segments happy, that leads to nothing but frustration.

Anyway, Flash is a detail, the important part is that your site projects your thing with power. Without having read the site at all I'd categorize it mentally as something to have with open source... superheroes... non-profit organizations... those are associations caused by your choice of color and detail, and they're probably pretty idiosyncratic to me solely. You could do much worse, usually I get to lump all indie rpg publishers into the same "I'd be goth if I could afford the make-up" category. No idea if this category fits you, though, as I don't have time to read the site this week ;)

Just as a counter-point to Eero. The Flash didn't bother me one bit, and I didn't think any of the things Eero did regarding big wasteful companies or small wanna-be companies or anything. The point being this will have to be one of those personal choices you make as content provider, and isn't even the biggest decision you should be concerning yourself with on the page. It's a keep it or toss it two second consideration at most.

I do agree with Eero that the main page is far too busy and weighted down with text: way too much to look at and do and read, and thus no real solid introduction that makes me want to move on and want to read more, nor a direction for me to clearly go in doing so (ie: what do I read next?). Either better/clearer separation of the content and its importance on the page, or lighter on the content on the page.

My first impression was one of confusion: "What is this?" "A page for an RPG? Another one?" "Ok, so what is this RPG about?" And it took a good deal of skimming to figure out if I was interested in continuing. If I wasn't looking specifically, if I'd come across the page randomly, I'd probably have just clicked off rather than spend the time looking for those answers.

greyorm wrote:
Just as a counter-point to Eero. The Flash didn't bother me one bit, and I didn't think any of the things Eero did regarding big wasteful companies or small wanna-be companies or anything. The point being this will have to be one of those personal choices you make as content provider, and isn't even the biggest decision you should be concerning yourself with on the page. It's a keep it or toss it two second consideration at most.

I do agree with Eero that the main page is far too busy and weighted down with text: way too much to look at and do and read, and thus no real solid introduction that makes me want to move on and want to read more, nor a direction for me to clearly go in doing so (ie: what do I read next?). Either better/clearer separation of the content and its importance on the page, or lighter on the content on the page.

My first impression was one of confusion: "What is this?" "A page for an RPG? Another one?" "Ok, so what is this RPG about?" And it took a good deal of skimming to figure out if I was interested in continuing. If I wasn't looking specifically, if I'd come across the page randomly, I'd probably have just clicked off rather than spend the time looking for those answers.

I don't like the FAQ layout.  FAQs are good if you've already intrigued the person and they want to know more.  It doesn't really make people want to know more.  A home page serves the same function as a resume -- you want someone who knows nothing about your project to glance at it for 5-10 seconds and know roughly what it's about, and to be interested if they are your target audience.

So instead of your FAQ topics, you could have a catchy headline and explanatory blurb underneath, with the headline being a link to a more detailed page.  Also, there are a thousand free/indie/whatever rpgs that claim similar things (Talking is as important as fighting!  Our magic system is the best ever!  Our rules are simple yet allow you to perfectly handle every conceivable situation!), none of which i believe without seeing some details.  So you'll have to back up the claims.  Which brings me to my #1 gripe...

If this is an open-source system (hence profit is not a motivator), why not put the rules up there right now?  Honestly, given the thousand-plus games looking for playtesters, you aren't going to be fending off hordes of eager beta-testers.  Why make them jump through hoops for just the chance to be selected for closed beta, for a system about which they know nothing? (Besides that it, like all others, has the best magic system ever.)  Let's face it -- none of us are releasing the next expansion for World of Warcraft, so the beta testers are doing us a favour, not the other way around.

James

PS. I didn't find the flash animation annoying.  It was tasteful as flash goes.

jag wrote:
I don't like the FAQ layout.  FAQs are good if you've already intrigued the person and they want to know more.  It doesn't really make people want to know more.  A home page serves the same function as a resume -- you want someone who knows nothing about your project to glance at it for 5-10 seconds and know roughly what it's about, and to be interested if they are your target audience.

So instead of your FAQ topics, you could have a catchy headline and explanatory blurb underneath, with the headline being a link to a more detailed page.  Also, there are a thousand free/indie/whatever rpgs that claim similar things (Talking is as important as fighting!  Our magic system is the best ever!  Our rules are simple yet allow you to perfectly handle every conceivable situation!), none of which i believe without seeing some details.  So you'll have to back up the claims.  Which brings me to my #1 gripe...

If this is an open-source system (hence profit is not a motivator), why not put the rules up there right now?  Honestly, given the thousand-plus games looking for playtesters, you aren't going to be fending off hordes of eager beta-testers.  Why make them jump through hoops for just the chance to be selected for closed beta, for a system about which they know nothing? (Besides that it, like all others, has the best magic system ever.)  Let's face it -- none of us are releasing the next expansion for World of Warcraft, so the beta testers are doing us a favour, not the other way around.

James

PS. I didn't find the flash animation annoying.  It was tasteful as flash goes.