>>748875209I've never seen so many replies under a webm from a single indie game. Is the menu that bizarre?
kys
>>748969672It's cool, but it needs better colors to differentiate options and submenus
>the webm that broke /v/Why are you doing youtube clickbaits on /v/
>>748969672>broke /v/most replies were praising it
>>748969672looks cool, but I can't find the game anywhere
>>748969672Like many of us already said, cool concept but poor execution. It's hard to see and it's laggy but it could work fine with some refinement
shit tourists say
>>748970260The white flash could go away, but everything else is cool as far as I'm concerned.
>>748969672>>748970260What’s the joke here, that it’s some shitty looking low effort trans game but they went all out on this advanced looking menu cube for some reason?
>>748970260Is this a bot thread? It's some furry character and then a square that lags? What am I praising or hating?
>>748970175Most replies didn't know what the fuck they were talking about.
It looks like a GameCube era menu.
>>748970260It's cool-looking but why the fuck does he scroll through so fast? Give people time to read what's going on, you stupid nigger
>>748969672I remember the reconstructed luigi model from the gigaleak also had a ton of replies
>posted it again
>>748970260a diagonal UI is a bad idea, get rid of that and it's fine
>>748970742I think that thread broke 1000 replies before it 404'd if I'm remembering correctly. Either way, seeing all the pieces of the forbidden one get reassembled was amazing.
>>748969672>Is the menu that bizarre?Not for anyone who's actually a fan of videogames (i.e. someone who has played or at least experienced Vangers).
escape from butcher bay had the same thing
>>748970260The flash like its a bollywood film
>>748970260>makes old school ui>runs like ass on modern hardwarekill all game devs.
>I've never seen so many repliesNewfag. Go back.
>>748970721Proof of concept maybe, a good UI should be responsive and let you complete a task quickly as long as you know what you're looking for, which this is a good example of.
>>748970260I actually don't hate this, but I think it does sacrifice functionality in favor of form. The font is maybe the biggest problem. It's difficult to read. Letters like A, O, R, P, look way too similar. "SHARPENING" looks like "SHAQDENING" or something. I'd pick something different.The light source pointed at the cube also makes some of the options difficult to read. When the "potato" preset is selected, the option for Bloom is almost entirely obscured by the light.
>>748970820this is some kind of psyop, /v/ does this shit to itself and has done so since the very beginning.
