Hotubs:

The interface of a hottub can range from rather complex to extremely simplistic depending on how many people are intended to interact with the controls. An example of a a simplistic one would probably be found at a gym or hotel. This interface will most likely only have two dials, one to control temperature and one to determine length time of use. While a single home hottub will have a more complex and automated UI because a casual user will have to maintain the tub as well as use it. Such as button for cleaning, maintaining jets, a maybe for a lighting system.

Some of the pro to a hottub UI is a specific and simplistic LCD screen for telling the user the exact temperate, since a hottub needs to be at an exact temperature. Another pro feature are the dials that can exhist to be able to control the pressure of the jets in the tub. Some of the cons that this UI faces is the complexity that the user has to deal with when maintaining the hottub. The UI creator should make it easy to locate any buttons that are not located on the main control panel. Such as the switch required to flip in order to reach the filters to change them.

Microwaves:

Microwaves are the perfect example of a UI that has gone through many retrials to try and create a better interface. Such as having buttons that are for a specific task like a button just for popcore or for thawing meat. A microwave might also contain a dial that lets you simple leave the food in for a determined amount of minutes.

These new interfaces can work well for simple tasks such as popping popcorn although as the machine gets older and not work as well the pretimed buttons may not be as efficient and the user will have to start using the plain number pad. One thing that I think suffers as the UI continues to change is the lack on instructions on the actual control panels. My microwave is from the 70s and contains a numberpad that represents seconds and a start button, no other buttons. It then has a short list that lets you know how long to cook things. A newer model usualy has no instuctions which I see as a loss and I was confussed when using a newer model and the number pad was set to minutes.

Itunes:

As an Apple based software iTunes has seen an extreme amount of changes that were both thoughtful and useful and changes that were frustrating and plain deplorable. Itunes at its core stores your music and videos collection and gives you a simple set of pause/play and fastforaward and backwards buttons. SInce then the people behind the UI have been trying to give the useres new options when listening to their music.

One of the strongest changes changes to the iTunes program is the introduction to the genius playlists that compile songs for you that are similar. I think this is when iTune began to fall apart because is music is not purchased through iTunes these "luxury" features do not work well if at all because the music files information will be somewhat different. If apple chose to take out their so called bells and whistles iTunes would probablely be a more satisfactory program. The part that I think suffers the most is apple trying to make a sleeker looking product by taking away visible controls and buring the deep into the program making it harder to operate.

Borderlands 2

Borderlands 2 is a 2012 first person shooter and is completely fun to play. As a sequal it already had it's bar set and needed to break past it. A part of what made this game so successful is that its similar, but improved apon, menu system used within the game. The first game was strong but lacked some features that could turn a few players away if they we not commited to playing it. Such as minimalist direction when it comes to navigating the map located in the in-game menu. In Borderlands 2 the creators have found a way to add more information and perks within the gameplay and menu system without cluttering the screens.

One of Borderlands 2's strongest changes to the UI was the new ability tree menu. The new branching system is slightly more complex and acomplished adding a few extra abilities into the mix, giving the player a more customized playing experience. The new look of the in game menu, while being a slight change helps keep the player in tune with the game even while in a still state, like choosing what guns to dominate with. The physical depth of the menus and pop-up screen visible to the other players feel much more connected to me that the original game. WHat thin I found lacking during game play was the new style and location of the mini map. Now located in a small square at the top of the screen, instead of a line of moving icon along the bottom bar of the screen. I found that mini map more disorientating and made me take my eyes off the screen more then the original system did causeing a painful bounce back between the map and gameplay.

Okami

This game when first introduced came in uder the radar and didn't really get an audiance and till a little while on the market. What really should be praised about this game is extreme and unique style of gaming that extend to every faccet of the game, including the UI system. Becaue this game follows a long and complex story this leads to an even more complex main gameplay character. I think this game found a good balance to the intensive amount of menus that didn't take away from the pure art style within the game.

My favorite part of the UI during physical game play was the dissapearing menus that only showed when activated. If you were to collect money, for example, you would only see you total amount once you picked up the money then would disapear again once you were done collecting. This keep the main screen clean and clutter free leaving the player able to enjoy the stylistic game as the continued to play. The player could still at anytime see how much the have of something if the navigated to the in-game menu. The one part when the game felt lacking to me a there was very little description given with in any menu. Everything was mostly represented in pictures and symbols. While nice to look at, it could leave a player comfused and cause actions the player could regret and not be able to retract. A simple labeling system within the UI would have greatly helped the game.

1. Shower faucet
Showers tend to have the issue of there is very little space on the knob between “molten lava” hot or “Arctic tundra” cold. Every shower you have to find that one centimeter spot on the faucet that is just the right temperature, burning and freezing yourself in the process until you do.
Well, while my shower may be an old run-down used apartment shower, it does have a particular interface design that I find very convenient. It basically has two knobs; one that controls the temperature and one that controls the water pressure. The water pressure one turns the shower on and off. The reason this is so convenient is because you can just leave the temperature knob on the perfect temperature. You don’t have to try to find it again each shower. Just turn the pressure knob and the temperature is already perfect.
On the downfall though, it is a very cheap shower. The faucet is made of a cheap plastic and is cracked and chipped in several places (it was like this when I moved in). It’s also hollow so it looks kind of nasty underneath it from years of moisture getting under it. The biggest problem though is probably when you do want to change the temperature, the knob is very stiff and hard to adjust. A lot of times it can result in jerking it way too far and turning the knob to freezing or boiling temperatures if you aren’t careful.

2. Toaster
The toaster is a very simple interface. It has two slots to put bread into. You control the toaster by turning the knob to the level you want it to toast and then pulling the lever down. Overall, it is a sleek, good looking machine. It is very simple and easy to use and visually I have no problems with it.
The one problem is in its design. It has one major flaw that completely depletes its purpose as a toaster: The slots are too small for the average piece of bread. As seen in the picture, the toaster cannot fit a normal piece of bread without turning it at an angle or tearing off bits of it. Basically, this toaster is a failure as a toaster. If there was one design change, it would be an obvious one: Make the slots big enough to put bread in.

3. Pokemon Battle Screen
The Pokemon battle screen is something so iconic that even people who haven’t played any of the games often recognize it. There had been countless parodies and alternate versions. Not a ton has changed since the original version mostly because there is not much to fix. It is a very efficient layout. Everything is presented fairly clear and everything has convenient placement. They even put the “Run” (or escape) button as the furthest option so that you don’t ever accidentally hit it and miss a chance for a rare pokemon on accident. “Fight” is the first option, appropriately. As this will be the option you use most often in battle, they make it the easiest to get to.
I suppose if anything were unclear or could be changed, I would move the EXP bar. It seems rather squashed between the options box and Pokemon health. I also remember, as a young child, not knowing what some of the terminology on the screen meant. Pokemon was one of my very first video games ever, so when Red and Blue came out, I had no idea what “HP” and “EXP” was. To be honest, I don’t think I even figured it out until several games later because it just doesn’t actually say what those abbreviations mean anywhere in the game.

4. Pokemon PC Screen
First off, I will be referring to the Pokemon Ruby and Sapphire PC screens. I’m not sure how different the PC screen is in other versions.
The Pokemon PC screen is pretty efficient. It is nice to be able to see all your pokemon in one place and to just be able to grab them. It has a nice layout that is pleasing to the eyes with fun colors, not to mention the Pokemon sprites are adorable, especially with the small bouncing animation. However, if I were in charge, there are a few things I would change.
While it’s nice to see all of your pokemon laid out in one place, I don’t think it’s the most efficient layout. It’s nitpicky, but sometimes it can be a pain to have to go over several pokemon, and down several more. I would propose making it just a scroll down list, so the only way you have to go is up and down to reach your pokemon. This would also allow space to see the name of your pokemon so if you have several of the same species, you will know which one you are going to rather than having to navigate all the way to it just to see if you picked the right one. There are markers to mark pokemon to fix this problem, but there are only so many and just making a list where you can see their names/level/gender/ect. would make it much simpler.
Also, the B button is generally the default “back” button of any game, so the “Close box” button could completely be taken out to make more room.

5. Chrome
Chrome is my favorite browser for its simplicity. While I’m aware Explorer and FireFox have both cleaned up their top bars, it still doesn’t seem to have the efficiency of Chrome. It’s great how customizable Chrome is. You can change it’s colors, the bookmarks are put in a convenient place, and the special options are out of the way but still easy to access. My favorite thing about it though is the search. All you have to do is type in your search and it’ll take you straight to google, there’s no special “search box” like the other browsers. In addition, I know it’s minor, but it gets me every time I have to use FireFox instead: Once you’ve visited a site, you often just have to hit the first one or two letters of the site and it will automatically take you there once you hit enter. Every time I do this with FIreFox, it will recognize the websites in a search below the Url box, then when I accidentally hit enter, it’ll take me to a search for those two letters I typed in, which annoys me to no end.
My biggest problem with Chrome however is the tabs. They’re simple and nice, but the “new tab” button is far too close to the X button of the tab next to it. Even just now as I was typing this, I accidentally hit the X button when I meant to hit new tab. Fortunately this saved and I didn’t have to retype anything, but in the past I’ve lost a lot of stuff because of accidentally closing a tab when I meant to open another.

Games:

                Metroid: Prime

                Despite being one of the early console specific first person games to be released, before their standardization, and eventual oversaturation, on console platforms, Metroid, mechanically, creatively and visually outpaced any of its competition. Priding itself as a first person adventure game, rather than a straight shooter, Metroid utilized puzzles and exploration, as its core mechanics, but mixing in varied combat and even survival elements, to create a very complex, but ultimately compelling, and with the help of the UI, user friendly  experience, which used every element to immerse the player in its world. Metroid even went so far that even the GUI reflected its dedication to creating a seamless user experience.

                Metroid contains probably one of the most balanced UIs in all of gaming, in the sense that it does a great of displaying all useful information necessary, while never breaking the player from their experience and even reinforcing the idea that you are in the game, going as far as hiding loading screens and draw distances.  Though, it’s not without its problems. For the most part the UI is consistent and reflects the design choice to maximize immersion, but to a degree that interferes with the GUI layout, creating a not overly cluttered but claustrophobic screen, with almost too many layers, between whatever screen effect are present, whatever’s going on in the gameplay, the outline of the mask, and the GUI itself. However, the symmetric nature of the GUI does a good job of keeping your attention forward and in the game, with long bars to deflect a wandering gaze, though with that it’s disheartening that the screen size wasn’t a priority.

                These long bars also contain important information in the game, with your health at the top, rocket ammo on the right, and danger level on the left, each one displaying an important variable to the player, and each easy to read, with multiple audio and visual cues, a bar graph, a pointer, a variable, along with a beeping warning. 

Probably, the biggest help in the game, though, is also a bit of a double edge sword, is the mini map. The mini map is a low poly 3d representation of the room and the surrounding areas, showing the player, the notable objects in the area, and any doors. It’s very helpful, especially considering the sheer size and complexity of the game. However, it’s hard to read, with its translucent visual design, and its bright orange color, while standing out, simply doesn’t fit with the rest of UI on screen.

Overall, the entirety of the UI works well to both immerse the player in the game and allow the player good view of all the necessary information.

Super Brothers: Swords and Sworcery

Probably the complete opposite of Metroid Prime, Super Brothers: Swords and Sworcery is a point and click adventure game developed primarily for the IOS, but also has a PC port. It utilizes beautiful minimalistic, yet stylized, graphics, which harkens back to early Atari 2600 visual design, with a bright and colorful palate and simple designs. Like Metroid, however, it seemed to pride itself on a seamless user experience, but going about it in a different way, as far as UI design goes.

Though being a point and click adventure game, Super Brothers: Swords and Sworcery shares some of the design ideas as Metroid, yet sticking to it's own sense of minimalistic design. Because of this, the UI, outside of the opening screen and inventory, is basically nonexistent.

The UI, when poking around the levels, comes down to little more than glowing orbs around objects that can be interacted with, which fit in well with the visual design of the game, but are easily missed, and because of this turns a lot of the game play into Where's Waldo, or Carmen Sandiego. Not because of vagueness, or cluttered visual design, but because of a dedication to a minimalistic design sensibility. This, does a lot for the look of the game, but can make playing a bit awkward, and more than once found myself just clicking around the screen looking for things to click on.

Another problem is in combat mode. its pretty straight forward, two buttons, one for dodging and blocking enemy attacks, another for attacking, but, on the PC version at least, the buttons are unnecessary, seeing as how the mouse is the only thing that's used to click on the buttons. This can cause problems when enemy patterns are not always consistent and hovering over one button makes switching to the other a very finicky and imprecise science. Your actual health bar is also a bit needless and doesn;t fit with the visual design, seeing as how it's just a bunch of stars, when there's plenty of indication in your flashing character when they take damage.

The UI is just a bit all over the place, while the actual look of it fits well with the visual design of the game, nothing really stands out and it makes things hard to miss. While the combat UI is just pretty bad and makes beating any enemy the first time more frustrating than it should be.

Physical:

Super Capacity 465 Oven

Ovens are probably the most common appliance in every household, many houses and apartments come furnished with them, and for good reason, considering they're pretty much mandatory for cooking even the most basic meals. While, gas stoves were the most common for the longest time, electric stoves are now taking over, partly because of their convenience, and also because of their reliability and simplified nature.

My Oven, the Super Capacity 465, is very easy to use, simply turn the dial to the heat level that you need for the stove top, or the temperature for the oven and you're good to go. Though, with this abundance of simplified inputs it sort of cuts down on features, like timers and cooking settings. It's very much a simple oven and stove, but the flat glass stove top, makes cooking and clean up very easy. However, getting the clock to set the right time is basically impossible.

Aroma Rice Cooker

Rice cookers are, of course, another common kitchen appliance, seeing how common and easy to cook rice is, and for the most part all rice cookers are the same, with very few differences in their design. The basic idea is always the same, rice and water goes in, steamed rice goes out. But over the years this has been simplified from timers to simple button presses for different settings.

My Aroma brand rice cooker, while not as simple as it gets, is very easy to use. Despite coming with different settings, like brown rice and warm, the only settings that are ever used are quick rice and white rice, which, assuming the portions of water and rice are good, will cook it just fine.

Though, problems lie in its bowl and warming design. the bowl is simply too large to cook enough rice for a single serving, it more often than not burns the rice or creates a sheet of hard rice caked on the bottom. So, it's only really able to make more than 2 cups of rice, at a minimum. However, I wouldn’t leave it in their any longer than it should be, because the heating function is way too high, so instead of keeping the rice warm, it burns it and makes all the rice on top dry.

Software:

Google Chrome

Googles web browser offers probably one of the best browsing experiences I can think of, both in user friendliness and sheer amount of functions available. Assuming that you haven’t poisoned your computer with the plague that is search bar addons, the visual design is very simple and solid, utilizing only 3 levels of things to monitor, tabs, options/URL, and favorites, sorting them very well, and using very recognizable icons for the options.

It's really just a great straight forward browser but utilizes a system for easily installing things like addons and extras that gel very well with the overall visual design, and has plenty of options for sorting objects and tabs within your browser, my favorite being the ability to simply drag and drop links into a new tab, which has since become a standard for all browsers.

Unlike its competitors, however, Google Chrome really lacks in creating a unique browsing experience, with very limited, basically nonexistent customization options and actually puts restrictions on what kind of addons you can install, as well as forcing you to log into a google account to access some parts of the browser.

Pianos

Pianos are timeless instruments, used in almost all genres of music at some point, and are usually easy to learn as long as you have fingers. There are 88 keys on a standard piano, with seven and then some octaves, each with twelve keys. Each octave has the same notes, the only difference is the pitch. Most people would be able to tell from playing a C in one octave and playing a C in a different one that they are the same key. Pianos also have three foot pedals; the one on the right being the sustain to hold the sound of all keys on the piano without pressing them down, the middle holds the keys being pressed, and the left makes the sound slightly softer in volume.

However, the part that may get confusing for those that don't play or study music is that some keys can be called different things when reading music, depending on what key the piece is in. For example, C can also be B#. the # meaning "sharp". That is because C comes right after B, and when you step up a key, it's Sharp. when you step down, it's Flat. Therefore, C can be B# since C comes right after B. Pianos are simple on the outside, yet reading music is an entirely different story. 

The inside of pianos, however, blow my mind. One may say you can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. As for me, I can tune neither. A piano tuner must be hired to tune a piano in most cases, and standard pianos should be tuned at least every 2-3 years. All I know about how pianos work on the inside is that when you press down keys on the outside, it activates a hammer that hits the string. I like to assume that's how all buttons work. 

Pianos are a work of art on their own, and amaze me in so many ways. The user interface of the instruments are easy from a pianist's perspective, perhaps, but to someone who doesn't know anything about music or the sort may be entirely confused. Which, in conclusion, is why piano teachers, lessons, and music schools exist.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time is most definitely my favorite in the Zelda series. Mostly for nostalgia, but also because it's just ridiculously fun. The only thing I'd say about it that I don't quite enjoy so much is the start menu interface and menus.

The main gameplay screen is wonderfully simple and straight to the point. In the top left, it has health shown in the form of a bar of hearts, and a green bar representing magic underneath. The middle/top right corner shows color-coded buttons for the sword, actions and equipped items correlating with the buttons on the Nintendo 64 controller. The blue button changes with actions, such as when riding Link's horse, Epona, or standing in front of a person to talk to. Lastly, there's a minimap in the bottom right, and the number of rupees collected in the bottom left. 

The main menus however, are definitely in need of some improvements. I get what they were trying to do with the style or whatever, but it's just organized poorly. There are four screens I believe, that can be switched using the Z and R buttons. Items, Equipment, Map, and Save menu. However, it takes about two seconds too long to switch between them. Also, the organization of the menus is a little weird. It takes far too long switching between boots, since during some levels you have to switch boots quite often. Also some of the main items such as the Ocarina should be on the Equipment menu rather than in with the Items. Though it is technically an item, just for the sake of convenience it should be with the main equipment since it's one of those things that's used frequently, and definitely more important than a deku nut or other items of the sort.

Otherwise, the menus are simple enough to understand aside from the inconveniences. Items can be easily equipped to the yellow C buttons by selecting them with the joystick, then pressing the C button on which the player wishes them to be equipped. In the end, the game is almost perfect, but the menus could use a lot of work.

Paper Mario 64

As a game for virtually all ages, Paper Mario 64 has my favorite storyline in the Paper Mario series, and holds a generally simple and straight forward user interface. The beginning menu is simply the title over a battle stage and mario in action. The "Press Start" underneath Mario guides you to to the next menu, in which you may create and choose from up to four game files to play, copy, or delete. During gameplay, the player can press the up C button to see health points, flower points, star power, experience points and coins. Pressing the other C buttons can quickly access the items menu with left, party members with right, and party members' special abilities with down. The only drawback to this is remembering which one is which, and switching from one to another has a slight delay which can be somewhat irritating in a hurry. 

There's also the main menu, which by pressing start one can access all of Mario's stats, such as number of star pieces, and what kind of hammer and boots he has currently. Using the joystick left and right switches menus between stats, Badges, Items, Party, Spirits, and Map. When switching menus, the player can press A to select the specified menu, then use the joystick to hover over various items to get more information, use items, switch party members, or equip/unequip badges. 

I find this menu system quite convenient because everything is laid out in an organized manner. The only thing that confuses me sometimes is the Badge menu. When pressing A, instead of moving the pointer to the badges themselves, it moves to the side categories "All Badges" and "Active Badges". Sometimes it takes me a second to figure out why the badges aren't scrolling after pressing A, and where the pointer went.

Lastly, when coming upon an enemy, Mario enters into a battle menu, which is set up like a stage in which Mario and enemies take turns attacking. Mario has five options that can be chosen between usnig the joystick. Each option has different things Mario can do for varying amounts of FP (Flower Points) or Star power. Also, the player can press Z to switch from Mario attacking first, or his partner. The battle screen also shows Mario's main stats at the top of the screen. After selecting a move or attack, Mario can do "Action Command" moves, by pressing various buttons or doing certain things right before landing on the enemy with the controls to do more damage. On the other hand, when the enemy attacks, Mario can potentially block with A or counter-attack with B if pressed at the correct moment. 

In conclusion, I love the user interface of Paper Mario 64 as well as its sequels. The only thing I would probably change is the font, because on certain TVs or screens it looks fuzzy, and it's almost too cutesy. Other than small things, I believe the Paper Mario UI is on the verge of perfect for what it is. 

Just wanted to drop off a few things here:

http://www.radgametools.com/default.htm

The home site of Iggy, a UI design program compatible with ActionScript 3.

http://gimcrackd.com/etc/src/

Twine. A programming program that primarily utilizes if-then statements. Great for creating a "Choose your own adventure" type game.

http://www.stencyl.com/

ActionScript 3 coder

These are tools that may be able to assist with the class. I think at least one of them requires a license, but I'm not sure.

1.  Microwave——————————————————————————

Microwaves in general have a door accompanied with a numeric pad and possibly a several other buttons specific to a particular function.  In general the controls are pretty self explanatory if the user has used the microwave before.  Where the interface of a microwave is lacking is in its ability to prompt the user with what to do.  For the most part however a microwave is something that the average human would stumble through to get the desired result.

                The strongpoint of the interface is in its simplicity. There is a place for food then you have the control options. Allowing the user to input numbers to tell the microwave how long to run. There are other control options that can be implemented like the "Defrost" button for example will run a special control which will limit the power output by the microwave.  Apart from several special buttons the controls are pretty self explanatory. The start button starts the process and the numbers input numbers. And there is a display which will display the time, or the time remaining.

                However this is only so self-explanatory because in today’s age everyone has grown up around one. However take someone extremely old for example, who hasn’t grown up with microwaves.  Most people wouldn’t know by looking at it or even watching it work what the machine actually does. And furthermore it isn’t common for a microwave to ask for input even after food has been added to the chamber.

                However the microwave in itself is a simple device and so its interface doesn’t require an extreme amount of complexity. It requires some food and slight input from the user then it carries out the process by heating the food or defrosting it, whichever the user had requested, then the hot food would be the output to my understanding.

2. Toilet———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

                Toilets are an incredibly simple machine and require minimal human interaction to function. Toilets consist of a bowl a drain a tank and a switch. The only real interface the human has to deal with is the bowl itself and the switch. Both the use for the toilet and its control are pretty self-explanatory and make it an incredibly simple product to use.

     The incredibly simple interface of a toilet is what makes it easy to use.  Clearly the bowl with hopefully clean water is the intended area for most of the user interaction. However it isn’t where the primary action is initiated. The switch which the user uses to initiate the toilets process of cleaning the bowl. The interface is simple and uncluttered.               

                The simplicity of the toilets interface is what makes it so universally acceptable. If for instance more controls were added to the toilet, like a temperature control for the seat or the water. More controls would only confuse the user and overcomplicate the process.

3. Maya————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–        

                The Autodesk Maya user interface can be daunting and frankly overwhelming to a first time user. The massive amount of buttons and controls spread out across the window allow the user an incredible amount of control and options. However to the unaccustomed eyes it can be perplexing and confounding. the basic control are located on the left side along with the self and interchangeable series of buttons along the top and the general adjustments are located on the right, timeline information is displayed along the bottom and finally the view screen is located in the center allowing the user to view the changes as they happen.  The number of buttons and options encompassed in the bars and menus leave many in the dust.

                The overwhelming complexity of the Maya interface is intimidating and scary at first. The mass amount of buttons and controls makes learning them all and the program itself a massive undertaking and a notable accomplishment. Many people who have been working with the program for year already will attest to its complexity and indeed admit to not knowing everything there is to know. Indeed there are more buttons and menus than anyone could become accustomed to and work smoothly with by default.

                However the complexity and massive amounts of buttons and controls isn’t a terribly bad thing. Since Maya allows the user to customize a lot of the buttons and shelves it can in turn be built around the kind of work the user is trying to do. Since the user is most likely only trying to do one of the many things Maya can do the interface, at one time, can be essentially built around the task at hand. That coupled with its ability to save the UI so a user can carry his customized UI with himself wherever he goes. this makes the Maya interface seem to feel less like an alien control station and more like a new phone with someone else’s apps.

                So the interface with its massive amount of buttons and immense complexity may be daunting at first however with time and further knowledge of the program and the excessive amount of controls on the screen actually become comforting once the user knows the tools at his disposal. The potential of the program at the user’s fingertips only starts to come into perspective as the user becomes accustomed to the intricacies that Maya has to offer.

4. StarCraft II ——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

                StarCraft’s standard interface is simple and open but allows for a lot of information to be up on the screen at the same time while remaining relatively uncluttered.  StarCraft II (SC2) tends to follow suit with the standard real time strategy game (RTS). All the standard elements are there that is, the player is presented with the standard mini map, resources, unit, and unit controls. Along with various other tabs and pop-up windows that are common with this type of RTS game.

                The top portion of the screen, much like most RTS games, is dedicated almost entirely to the viewport where most of the action takes place. The bottom portion of the screen is the players command deck equipped with the mini-map, an area in the center for selected units and potentially unit stats, followed up by any controls the user may have at a given time. The controls may change depending on what the user has selected. SC2 also offers up something a little unique in its design in that it displays a portrait for the main unit selected, which I can only assume is just meant to look cool. Across the top is listed general menu the player may be interested in however probably won’t want to access all the time, as well as the players resources at hand and current population count and limit.

                SC2 did a few things that are similar to the original StarCraft, which may be why they are still there, however they could be placed better, or not at all. What I am talking about in particular is the Mineral, Gas, and Population count. In SC2 it is placed at the top right of the screen. When everything else the player checks regularly is at the bottom portion of the screen why these important numbers would be displayed so far away from all the other pertinent information and instead posted at the top with the specialty menu buttons.  The other problem I had when I was going over it was the portrait of the current user. This was more acceptable in the previous StarCraft because campaign messages or announcements would also be displayed there however with SC2 these announcements became a pop up window on the left side of the screen which vanishes after the message. Thus I felt the selected unit’s portrait was unnecessary and the space could have been used better.

                Apart from the few issues I have I still think the SC2 UI is great. The UI artwork will change Depending on the player’s current race which a nice feature is allowing the player to get really immersed in their team.  Another nice feature is the hotkeys for most buttons are posted on the button itself so the user can become more accustomed to using hotkeys without having to look them up. The UI itself leaves the viewport for the action entirely uncluttered and it is a good thing to because the user can fill that space with units or buildings which would make the area way to cluttered if there was constantly messages there.

                SC2 has a nice UI built for beauty and function. Much of the UI looks like it was taken directly from the original StarCraft simply with a few addition like the idle worker tab which will pop up over the mini-map with a hotkey posted which will grab an idle worker as well as tell you how many there are.  And it works; simply put it wasn’t broke so it didn’t really need fixing just upgrades.

5. Battlefield 3——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

                Battlefield 3 (BF3) is much like many other 1^st person shooters and has a lot of the same problems to overcome. BF3 did an amazing job in its interface; however there have been a lot of games before it to learn from. The issue often presented to a game like this is the players desire to have a multitude of information on the screen while not cluttering the screen and impairing the player’s ability to see.  Players need to clearly know where to go where they are, where there team is, and any other information they can get in the field.       

             BF3 did a pretty amazing in its ability to display this information in a quick and easy way that allows player’s access to information as it happens. The gun and its ammo along with the weapons type are all grouped in the bottom right corner surrounded by bars that display the health and current XP to help with the visibility the backdrop for all this information is mostly transparent which allows the player to clearly see the displayed information while not impairing the players vision. Symmetrically the left side of the screen has the mini map and most of the team data. The mini map is clear and useful and at the bottom a compass is also displayed. Above the map are the scores of both teams and any objectives and their owners will be displayed above? To the right of this the player’s squad mate’s names are displayed along with their unit type and ability. These are the stationary elements of the interface. What makes this interface particularly nice is it also has floating markers and vanishing notices. BF3 displays the floating objectives of the player on the screen so it will move on the screen as the player turns. This is nice because it requires less looking about the screen and mini-map to find where to go, its right in your face. BF3 also displays a notice whenever the player gets a kill or receives a major achievement as well as if anyone else gets a kill. This information is displayed in different location which some would think would make the screen cluttered with scores and name. What makes it nice and clear is this information is only displayed seconds after the reason. So the screen is mostly clear during gameplay.

                Most of the information the player is interested in like, their own incoming points, is displayed at the bottom of the screen under the players gun making it easy to see. Other players kills would be displayed in the top right and the achievements you receive are largely displayed at the top, separating the achievements from the kill points.  It would have been nice to have all this information displayed could be displayed in one area using different colors to distinguish the difference in points. This however is only a minimal thing as any of these messages or only displayed for seconds at a time. 

            As a rule, it’s become ordinary to have a subset of competing companies vying for the attention of the average user through proper or simple user interface. Over time it’s become more apparent that the those words have been eroded due to the sea of appliances and specifications that have been given over the decades. Physical implementations that I will be focusing on are the monitors that are often stared at for years of our lives and, perhaps unconventionally, the average lamp. Other than the physical side of life, there’s also the ever changing flow of games and their chosen dialect to give to gamers. With that said, I will be focusing my attention on Mass Effect one, a property handled with care but optimized so poorly that it had jarring inconsistencies. I will also be attending too the well done Halo 4, with one strange problem. Lastly, I will be leading into Steam software that has become the mainstay of PC gamers but seems to have a few niggling problems when it comes to user interface that could be cleaned up.

Up First: Mass Effect (2007) – Bioware – XBOX 360

            Bioware’s flagship product that has risen as its prime-time candidate as one of the greatest Role Playing Games (RPG) ever made. It has an excellent story, fantastic characters, and a sweeping cinematic effect that denizens of Earth would no doubt fall in love with. All was not particularly swell, and though many gamers could forgive the clunky controls and horrendous roving segments on planets which was later replaced in its sequel with something far more absurd. The beast of Mass Effects burden would always swing back elegantly too its messy and inconsistent User Interface. You, the reader, knew it had to come down to this fact. Mass Effect was an inefficient and inconsistent bundle of “Who created this part of the UI and why does he or she hate us?” Enough of my hyperbole, down to brass tax, these are the things that bugged me, and maybe you, about the Mass Effect UI, too which I will only be focusing on the HUD.

Let’s take a close look at the HUD, which is a broken concept that doesn’t seem to know what it wants to do. To the bottom left corner of the HUD the player can sort of understand that there are symbols and bars meant to represent their players and other parts of the players visuals. Taking a close look at the HUD it’s easy to tell that you have names associated with red bars that are meant to indicate health. As the player looks closely at the bar it becomes obfusticated as he or she begins to question why the bar is slanted in an italicized way, as nowhere else in the game is this style found. The player also questions why the main character has a slightly larger health bar than the teammates and what the HUD icons are trying to represent. Anyone with an outside view of the game may not fully understand or even get what the game is trying to represent on the screen and there's no help to be found unless you go into another subsection of menus or directly use the objects or items in order to gain knowledge of what it does. Players may guess that the upper icon would represent health, but it’s unlikely that the lower selection of lines would be meant for grenades. Mass Effect has the distinction of grenades being disc’s, and instead of just using a symbol to show a grenade, it simply tells the player that it’s a disc, and that’s that. This leads to further confusion as many symbols in the game are far too direct to the game for their own good. Taking away from the negative, it at least gives you a clear idea of the weapon you’re using is something big and heavy and perhaps like a machine gun in some way.

            Moving on to the right side of the HUD is the player map and the feedback of success that a player may feel when playing the game. Success in a game makes the player feel powerful, wanting to move on and be more successful or generally in control. Mass Effect takes another route entirely and lets the player know that they got something or some stuff and maybe some experience points with the a nice “Level Up” thrown in as well. While it sounds nice at first, it quickly becomes irritating when the player begins to realize that these things are automatically thrown at you and the player has no idea how far from the goal they really are. It’s also important to note that these notifications only show up for around four to five seconds before they completely disappear and they are never to be seen again. There’s no log, and no way to bring any of those quick messages back to the forefront. Without the proper feedback to the player, it creates a large dissonance that doesn’t compel the user to keep fighting and to keep gaining experience as it no longer becomes satisfying to kill as it becomes more nebulous as to how much more powerful the player becomes. All that compels the player forward, when the reward seems so insignificant, is the chance to see more of the story as it unfolds. The experience points that are dangled in front of your eyes bears no significance as you’re not even sure how much more is needed to level up in the game.

      Other than the HUD, which has been lambasted thoroughly at this point, there are other glaring problems within’ the games UI. Mass Effect fails on almost every frontier, but for the second part of this critique, I would like to take a closer look at the character management screen. At first glance, all seems pretty swell, there are plenty of boxes that coincide nicely to the Talent tree with your designated points at the top of the screen. However, you begin to take a harder look at the screen and realize there’s something peculiar about the icons and faces being used. The information that’s provided by the boxes is nearly unhelpful and the player is left to his own devices on why that health increase and regeneration is so much better than the other choices being made. With nothing being explicitly told to the player, there’s nothing in the RPG to give them an idea of why picking one Talent over the other is such a bright idea. The player doesn’t have a details section of how these cumultive points are affecting his or her character, just that they are. The numbers and karma sliders to the left of the character also bring up new questions as to why three of the numbers represented on the screen are in such strange positions. There’s little to no reason for the paragon and renegade sliders to be tilted around the character and it takes some indeterminate amount of time to find out if it’s going in the positive or negative direction.

      It also doesn’t help that out of the total party members, which is a grand total of six, are completely locked out of the menu when you’re out roaming with your party of three. Perhaps it was to force the player into rotating characters to look closely at their statistics and assign talents, but the game often forces you to use a specific character, and even then the game doesn’t punish you for using your favorite team of characters. This doesn’t seem like a problem when it comes to updating statistics and making new talents, but it’s a whole world of hurt when it comes to the equipment loading screen as Mass Effect has a blizzard of terrible design choices implemented to hurt the player. If I were to go any deeper into this rant, this would turn into a monster of an essay. The one positive thing I can say about the choices made for the character management screen is that the back button stayed consistent as regulated to the red “B” button.

Moving On: Halo 4 (2012) – 343 Industries – XBOX 360

            This is going to be more deferential take on the gaming UI that is employed on Halo 4, by all accounts, a well made game that’s slick and easy to understand. Halo 4 employs a fantastic set of menu’s that make very little sense and give you a sense of “What could this possibly be?” until it’s clicked on. Halo, up until the latest iteration, has always employed the stalwart and resolute “Multiplayer” option for players to pick. It’s become a more accepted vernacular among gamers over time and it’s certainly the most reasonable to understand as it can be broken down into Multiple Players among more casual players. Halo 4 decided to employ a brand new and untested word to give to players and that is the “Infinity” version of multiplayer, which ends up being standard multiplayer with other modes attached. That’s a little confusing, especially since the player would regularly expect a multiplayer mode or even “Waypoint” to be a place of convergence which actually does something completely different. Otherwise, the option is pretty simple and doesn’t seem all that terrible when you get over the fact that Infinity means multiplayer, so the player makes the plunge and accepts whatever comes next.

The player has successfully gained passage to the Infinity screen where players are greeted to four new subsections that all look beautifully synchronous with each other, flowing gracefully back and forth. Foreground and background elements light up and move in dizzying patterns giving off a very futuristic and natural vibe. With that said, it all comes back to more confusing naming patterns. Forge being lifted straight from the past and being given new life as an avenue of play for Halo users accustomed to the customization that Forge provides. Theater, another staple of Halo, allowing for saved replays of games and all seems great. Letters and design all feel congruent and have a great connection with other players as shown consistently in the bottom right of the screen. The biggest problem, however, has to be its consistent use of Infinity and Wargames to Spartan Ops. One would assume that you’re in the assumed multiplayer section of the game that these two things would be self explanatory, but the more the player questions what they mean the less these things begin to make sense. It’s almost as if the minimalistic styling is beginning to work against the intuitive feel that it was going for. Spartan Ops is, in fact, a new subset of campaigns meant for players to explore new portions of the expanded Halo universe. It’s not directly a campaign for multiplayer and doesn’t need to be in such a category, but that’s how it was propped up by being put into the Infinity section. This is the first big clue that Infinity was never meant to be Multiplayer exclusively but does lend itself in that way. The player finally gets his or her head wrapped around the idea that the way in would have to Wargames.

            Thus ends the harrowing journey that finally, and implicitly, tells you what in the world the player is looking at and what they’re doing so far down the rabbit hole. Except now you’re back to the Infinity moniker being used again in the subsection of Infinity under the Wargames Lobby. It feels like there’s a clear discrepancy between these ideas that were not entirely forged out for all to understand, which feels like a shame. Instead of being Multiplayer to Multiplayer Games with other submenus in-tact, the player has to wrap their head around mostly incongruent ideas that let the average player be completely unsure of what message the game is trying to convey. This is a simple fix, and one that should’ve never likely got past the testing stages. Otherwise, the game stays consistent with its theme and gorgeous flowing menu system while staying mostly on point, but without enough explanation until the final menu. To this day, months after release, I’ve yet to bother with Spartan Ops until this day, just to get a clearer idea of what its point is, which doesn’t indicate great design to me.

            Huge, gigantic adendum that must be made right here and right now. Descriptions are actually handed to the player right below the menus. I can't imagine how every one of my friends and myself ommitted this very clear fact, I guess my eyes never had the chance to just roam downwards. Thus, whenever I describe the befuddlement of the reasoning behind using Inifinity over Multiplayer, that still completely stands but the description never came to light until this very sad moment. I don't know if this completely dissolves my opinion and my critique, but I shall make the fixes that I feel are still necessary. Blast my own faults and I do appologize for just not taking a closer look from the start.

Physical Object: Computer Monitors (1980’s – Till Death Probably)

            Everyone that I know uses a computer monitor at some point in their lives, it’s the most useful and diligent pieces of hardware that sticks with the user until, maybe one day, it shall be put to rest. Monitors have the accolades of being pretty easy to use as far as their plug and play nature tends to make them. The most inconsistent point of contention that most users, including myself, tend to have is the way power on and buttons are set up. From school computers to unclear or even hidden buttons exist to solely annoy the average user and create consistent strain to remember how to set up each monitor. Over the years the differences have settled to the bottom right corner of the monitor, but for a time it was in a state of flux. Monitors, even as the one seen above, would have power buttons glaring in the center or would employ side buttons or even some along the top of the monitor.

            Going into the menu system of these beasts can, at times, be a chore to work through as the symbols can be superfluous or totally incomprehensible. The more accepted contrast and symbols for what they represent have gotten better over time, giving brief descriptions of what the point of the symbol is and what you’re doing. As it turns out, there’s a fantastic key under most menu’s for defaulting back to where everything works again, just not to the users specifications. It would be generally fantastic, however, if monitors were more homogenous in their design with sleek and minimalistic in mind as the higher end models tend to be. Most monitors can be set up in specifications to specifically render out code or even use three to twenty monitors at once all allocated from one machine. All in all, the monitor has certainly calmed down to be ubiquitous over time, but at first it was truly the wild west of compatibility issues.

Physical Object Two: Lamps (1870’s – Till The End)

     I will be focusing on the advent of the Kerosene Lamp and the flourishment of the fluorescent lamp. Kerosene lamps used kerosene as their fuel and judging from the success of such a device, was certainly not relinquished of its hold over America and throughout the world until far later into the 19th century. Kerosene lamps were so dominated the landscape that it would consume “77 billion litres of fuel per year” and is still used in areas where electricity is just out of reach or too costly. With that in mind, it’s a safe bet that a large portion of the class has never had to use a Kerosene lamp which is often prone to exploding or generally viable to run into problems of all shapes and sizes. Kerosene lamps have a wick, and when loaded with the proper amount of oil can last up to an indeterminate amount of time. Also, Kerosene lamps have up to seven different types of fuels and 6 different types of lamps that tend to look identical to one another with different types of systems to make them run. The greatest part about all of this information is that, as most parts of the world progress, the Kerosene is becoming a lesser used form of lighting.

    On the other end of the spectrum, the fluorescent light bulb came to light in the 1850’s but wasn’t fully fleshed out until the the early 1900’s. As most things new things come to be, it was a slow moving process filled with plenty of trial and error and resistance to change was vast as General Electrics took over the fluorescent making techniques. Years and years later the acceptance of fluorescent bulbs flourished over time as a simple and eloquent solution to the modern light loving user. These bulbs have been packed and condensed in the 21st century, assuring future generations the use of cheap and efficient luminescent bulbs for decades to come. Rather than gaining and attaining proper wicks and oil it was down to installing and plugging into a wall or getting a new bulb to replace the one that may have burnt out over time. While kerosene involved hazards of explosions and pain, the fluorescent bulb derided that sentiment by being simple for the modern consumer which could be far more resilient than the average wicker implement. Lamps have gained a lot of traction over time, and have only continued to evolve with the use of science and electricity, giving simpler means of lighting to the everyday man or woman.

Software: Steam (2003 – Unknown)

((The new Interface is on top and the old is on the bottom.))

    The undisputed king of digital distribution to the core PC gamers. Valve Corporation, starting in the distant past of 2003, has had nearly ten years of existence to gain dominance and good will with the discerning PC gamers. With the venerable Gabe Newell at the lead, Valve has been setting unprecedented amount of achievements that keep the platform viable and workable. While not everything in Valves past has been rosey, most gamers tend to trust Valve to do the right thing and dive into the eye catching and simple to use interface of Steam. Initially developed for the Microsoft OS, and later ported to the MAC OSX and currently being built for the Linux based platform, the platform spans across all software to be viable and simple to use. This method of development further entices developers to take another look at the PC market as a way to gain access to a larger fan base and develop new customers. Recently, Steam has considered it necessary to bring in a second UI accessed at the top left of the corner under the close out screen and next to the username and mail icon. This section Steam is meant for the couch players and meant to plug into a screen, leaving many gamers open to the interpretation that Steam is heading towards the console market, especially with the “Steam Box” somewhere around the corner.
    The UI of Steam has certainly evolved over time to become more ubiquitous and user friendly as things are clearly laid out and explained to the average individual. Steam has always had the bases of a tab system to move between menus and layouts for the consumer. The UI has had development changes from a dingy puke green which continued to have tabs aplenty to a sleek black and white layout which takes a bit of know-how but can be picked up by the casual consumer over a brief amount of time. This, combined with the consistent and random sales of games, has made the network a powerhouse. If there was anything I would love to change in the UI, it would be for Steam Support to be an icon or tab right in the interface next to the “NEWS” tab. It may not be necessary for everyone but it would be a nice on and off preference to have. To be really wild, a “Favorites” tab for whatever the user desires to put into that tab as a hub for their favorite part of Steam as a quick and easy access menu.

Warcraft 3 is one of the greatest RTS’s in my book and that’s probably why I choose it.  It hosts itself to a huge array of units to destroy the opposing player or players.  The game hosts a console for such things as menu options, time of in game day, lumber, gold, supply count, mini-maps, unit commands, quick team mate communication, and even a hero inventory.  I enjoy the use of the space and the feeling that things aren’t as cluttered within the UI.  Another thing I enjoy about the UI is the ability to have continuity between races – where you select units where you build it really determines your main actions.

Even though Warcraft 3 has all these great things, it shows it age and could benefit by newer methods of design.  Something things like dramatic negative space really isn’t useful in a fast paced game like Warcraft 3 milliseconds could mean loss.  I also poke fun at the ability of the UI to not go opaque when not relevant to current player information.  Things like gold, lumber are ever moving numbers and should always be shown.  Things such as supply, time of game time day, and menu commands, are static or very rarely changing so I would group them together.

In conclusion I think blizzard would be able to fix and address these issues which have mostly been fixed in their follow up RTS Starcraft 2.

Microsoft word is a terrible UI cluster of information.  I’ve been using the program from its early begging’s and have been pretty much raised on it.  The program works well and the UI from what I know is ok.   Still I cannot find everything that I usually need or the special features that I want to imply.  The tabs get me confused and the ability to rip the widgets from those tabs can make a new person who is in office have a nightmare about it at night.  The widget tabs don’t always have relative things to that labeled topic within that tab.  This is kind of lame and disheartening because the intuitiveness of this UI is misleading. 

How I would make it better?  I would change the tabs to make sense such as put a layout page, a format page, a review page, and a home page which could be customized.  This would make it easier for people to navigate around.  Also to I would have another programs tab so other things like excel, power point, and other products to work within the project and be able to show their user interact benefits.  It would make it easier for people just to use the program in general.

The program too would utilize some kind of use for the empty space to help people check grammar, spell check and excuse certain words.  It could maybe link up to a word bank so that it would get used to certain type of name or demographical term.  I think word is outdated by Google docs so I say check that out before even giving the consideration to the office suite.

Magicka is a third person adventure isometric game where you derp around with friends on a whimsical adventure.  I can’t really say anything good about its UI.  It’s not legible, confusing, and most of the time disgusting looking.  The game itself has really no clues and no direction.  Each room too, following the tangents of wackiness usually has no objective.  The UI relies completely on experimental players willing to die glitch and learn how the UI allocates different spells and secondary actions.  Yet, I’m still not sure if it was intended or not to be like the way it is.  The games mode is fun exploratory and carefree so why shouldn’t the UI be?

So what would I do to fix this mess?  First have an organizational list of all the spells.  Make each icon on the UI distinctive so players know what spells they are using.  On top of that I would make a selection in the bottom of the screen big so players can see the icon reinforcement.  After the spells were cast I would drag them to the right side of the screen so that players would know how to quick imitate the same spell that the player had cast last.  If an enemy was only weak to a certain spell I would add the icon above their head if the player failed to damage the enemy at a certain time.  This would help the mystery of the game.  Lastly to fix the spell casting I would have a meter of lethality and healing bar so players know what kind of thing they are concocting.

A fog of war map would help for those who have explored with icons showing specific things that were destroyed explored or harmed to show some kind of objectification even in the chaos.  This would familiarize people with the world of the creator and give players some form of orientation.  The game is linear in its story but it offers so many options to show its adventure genre traits.  Sadly none of these are taken with the UI or within the design.   I think more orientation in the world would be a greater immersive experience in the game.

Lastly I would have a stat system.  There are many different wizards and colors you can choose but no real way to tell the difference between them other than their appearance.  Having stats or earning the ability to see them would be a great addition to the game to make effective choices for the wizard and to bring the RPG element that the wizard flavor always brings.  I would also bring this to the items and stats of things that you can acquire in the game.

The cup interface is completely abstract.  Yet the negative space draws my eye to the spacing in between the porcelain arc and the side of the cup at first look.  I guess this could suggest that to put something through it or invitation because of the arc.  The biggest place the eye is drawn to when holding the object is the negative space of chasm of the cup.  It’s empty and smooth, unlike the outside that is rougher look and geometrically flat.  This tells me that the side that balances is probably the bottom of the cup.  The designs on the outside of the cup point up towards the chasms maybe telling me that stuff goes into it.  The inside is colored red which may tell me that this cup is used for hotter brews.

What would I do to make it better or more apparent?  I would put an indented handprint around the cup showing the way that it is mean to be held.  The next design choice I would make is to make finger groves for the holder of the cup showing some kind of comfort when holding the cup.  I would craft a small flat ramp into the cup not messing with the shape but with “ramp” I would put an arrow pointed down.  This would show that things go in to this place.  On the side I would make a scoop follow the same policies of the cup the arrow would point out with a stream following it.  This would show where to drink from.

In conclusion, the cup is pretty much a full proof item and could be emulated in the perfect for of “two hands clasped open together”.   Though the straw is a more efficient form of drinking because it is literally a line to point to be consumed and consumer the cup still holds its own today. 

The T-shirt, its interface is hard to figure out.  The biggest part is on the bottom does that mean that the bulk of me go into that.  I have smaller limbs too that I could fit through the small holes.  It also seems possible to put my head through the head socket and for it to fit ok.   The only thing that tells me I’m doing anything wrong is my observance to know that the extra holes are not filled.  It also seems that it can easily be forced to let me wear the shirt in any way I want.  The shirts design and interface is abstract at best.

How would I make it better?  I would make the T-shirt look like the human thorax.  It would come with things it would have indications such as “nips” for the shirt to show the right implantation.  The holes would only be the size to tightly hug the muscles that are supposed to protrude from each socket.  I would put divots pointing out from all the sockets showing the flow in which you are supposed to get dressed.

In conclusion the shirt was a hard interface to redesign without just drawing a diagram on the shirt showing how to wear a shirt.  I think that would have been easier than my nips solution or making arrows engraved.  I think all human clothing to not be abstract would literally have to be slip to skin to be full proof.