Should resource counter be moved near mini-map?

[newcomplex]

It should be customizable. You should be able to put the Resources and Supply counters anywhere on the screen you want.

That would result in pros removing everything besides a map and resources (probably overlaid on the map, as well as a hp counter). Then, everyone who cares would be forced to imitate the pros in this regard, and ultimately, the gaming experience would just be worse.

[Gifted]

@Archer:

If you think what I said is aligned with what you're suggesting then I believe I didn't portray the points correctly. >.<

In short, the parts of your brain involving the use of your minerals and gas is utilizing that information and making conscious choice based on factors that's already been accounted for. This is what I'll refer to as "conscious choice" though that term may be confusing and could probably be improved upon. The information provided in the diamond in an RTS is more reactional. The reason is, if you see a zergling approaching your terran base, you react and your mind handles the activity. This style of activity is "reactional choice".

The reason why I suggest that the resources stay in the upper right is that your mind recognizes that eye activity as making a conscious choice. This separates it from the area your eye recognizes as "reactional choice zone".

Another point... your eye is also drawn to any moving activity in it's easy peripheral vision. By placing the resources (which are always "moving") out of your natural span of vision, you provide less distractions, allowing your eye to better react to changes on the screen that were not activated by your own actions.

Even if I'm doing a poor ability of portraying my point, I'll simply state that since my experience with some of the more experienced designers in the industry... I think resources are best placed in the upper right in an interface such as SC2 provides.

[Santrega]

@Archer:

If you think what I said is aligned with what you're suggesting then I believe I didn't portray the points correctly. >.<

In short, the parts of your brain involving the use of your minerals and gas is utilizing that information and making conscious choice based on factors that's already been accounted for. This is what I'll refer to as "conscious choice" though that term may be confusing and could probably be improved upon. The information provided in the diamond in an RTS is more reactional. The reason is, if you see a zergling approaching your terran base, you react and your mind handles the activity. This style of activity is "reactional choice".

The reason why I suggest that the resources stay in the upper right is that your mind recognizes that eye activity as making a conscious choice. This separates it from the area your eye recognizes as "reactional choice zone".

Another point... your eye is also drawn to any moving activity in it's easy peripheral vision. By placing the resources (which are always "moving") out of your natural span of vision, you provide less distractions, allowing your eye to better react to changes on the screen that were not activated by your own actions.

Even if I'm doing a poor ability of portraying my point, I'll simply state that since my experience with some of the more experienced designers in the industry... I think resources are best placed in the upper right in an interface such as SC2 provides.

Gifted, what if I want the resources to catch my eye as often as possible? Wouldn't it make more sense to add it there then?

I think this should be a setting in the game options to where I can move it to a few different locations.

[Josue]

Should resource counters be moved near mini-map?
Looking at votes it seems like the answer is a strong NO. Besides, as it is said:
Don't try to fix it if it's not broken, it worked the way they are in SC1 and there is no strong enough reason to need such a change. However, seeing posts like Gifted's makes me think there are lots of reasons to keep them the way they are.

[ArcherofAiur]

@Archer:

If you think what I said is aligned with what you're suggesting then I believe I didn't portray the points correctly. >.<

In short, the parts of your brain involving the use of your minerals and gas is utilizing that information and making conscious choice based on factors that's already been accounted for. This is what I'll refer to as "conscious choice" though that term may be confusing and could probably be improved upon. The information provided in the diamond in an RTS is more reactional. The reason is, if you see a zergling approaching your terran base, you react and your mind handles the activity. This style of activity is "reactional choice".

The reason why I suggest that the resources stay in the upper right is that your mind recognizes that eye activity as making a conscious choice. This separates it from the area your eye recognizes as "reactional choice zone".

Another point... your eye is also drawn to any moving activity in it's easy peripheral vision. By placing the resources (which are always "moving") out of your natural span of vision, you provide less distractions, allowing your eye to better react to changes on the screen that were not activated by your own actions.

Even if I'm doing a poor ability of portraying my point, I'll simply state that since my experience with some of the more experienced designers in the industry... I think resources are best placed in the upper right in an interface such as SC2 provides.

Again what your saying points to putting resource above the mini map (outside of the triangle.

I get what your saying about being a choice to view that location and activating brain what not. However having the eye move above the mini map would also be a choice, ie away from center of the screen. Additionaly it would have the advantage of allowing players to easily gather battlefield intel while assessing economic status.

[Operatoring]

That would result in pros removing everything besides a map and resources (probably overlaid on the map, as well as a hp counter). Then, everyone who cares would be forced to imitate the pros in this regard, and ultimately, the gaming experience would just be worse.

How is custom UI in anyway detrimental to the quality of the game? Why would they be forced? Because it is easier to look at the counters and the mini-map at the same time? This sounds like... intuitive design. Wow, what a thoughtful concept!

[Gifted]

While it may seem intuitive, there are times when combining the activities of your eyes can cause more confusion/clutter in practice. While you may not agree with me.. it's confirmed that placing things that are "constantly shifting/moving" in your "Native vision" will distract you from actually seeing things you TRULY want to view.

In short, when you have something in your left peripheral vision constantly changing, it might making noticing that glimmer of cloaked movement harder for your eye to catch. In other words, as your eye tunes out the constant "changing numbers" in it's native view... other things you wish your eye didn't tune out may be lost in translation and not noticed where otherwise you would have noticed it.

[ArcherofAiur]

While it may seem intuitive, there are times when combining the activities of your eyes can cause more confusion/clutter in practice. While you may not agree with me.. it's confirmed that placing things that are "constantly shifting/moving" in your "Native vision" will distract you from actually seeing things you TRULY want to view.

In short, when you have something in your left peripheral vision constantly changing, it might making noticing that glimmer of cloaked movement harder for your eye to catch. In other words, as your eye tunes out the constant "changing numbers" in it's native view... other things you wish your eye didn't tune out may be lost in translation and not noticed where otherwise you would have noticed it.

And lets say you have siege tanks sieging or cloaking shimmers in the top right of the screen. Right underneath your resource counters.

[Operatoring]

While it may seem intuitive, there are times when combining the activities of your eyes can cause more confusion/clutter in practice. While you may not agree with me.. it's confirmed that placing things that are "constantly shifting/moving" in your "Native vision" will distract you from actually seeing things you TRULY want to view.

In short, when you have something in your left peripheral vision constantly changing, it might making noticing that glimmer of cloaked movement harder for your eye to catch. In other words, as your eye tunes out the constant "changing numbers" in it's native view... other things you wish your eye didn't tune out may be lost in translation and not noticed where otherwise you would have noticed it.

All the more reason it should be customizable to fit the specific needs of the player.

"Glancing down at his mineral count by the mini-map the player notices a red dot moving fast towards his supply line. 'A Warp Prism?!' he thinks as he rushes his SCVs away, avoiding the terrible terrible damage the High Templars could have inflicted. 'Thank Blizzard and Operatoring for this intuitive design... I might have missed that drop had it not been for the ability to put those counts where I please.' He sighs relieved"

Case and fucking point.

[Gifted]

No need to swear *winks* There is nothing to gain about "winning a discussion" here.

As an alternative, you have players of two different skills. Player A is able to maintain a visual on his minimap and the resource in the upper right at the same time. He's able to provide adequate macro while watching the minimap in a way to identify an impending templar drop and counters well.

Player B is working on macro but in his focus on that, doesn't glance at the minimap as he should. The templar drop works against him, devastating for his economy. The skill of the opponent is rewarded for pulling off the maneuver because he utilized a weakness in his opponent.

In both cases the players have the ability to watch minerals and watch their minimap. They have "learned" the tools. One of them has a better "mastery" of using both. This example is in reference to Blizzard's "Easy to Learn, Lifetime to Master" mentality and is incorporated in all facets of it's gameplay. Just like game balance itself, these discussions should be about considering pros and cons... not about trying to prove yourself right and others wrong. Typically the latter involve disrespecting others, which I believe you may have done quite well with your ending comment

Sometimes adding "challenge" to an interface has a purpose and benefit... it allows for a higher skill ceiling and rewards those who can handle it faster and better than opponents who can not.