rate our site Thread

what do you guys think:
the new
vs the old

oh, also please do not mind the large fonts on the old. i'm asking cause i wondering whether its worth the time updating the old style sheets.

what do you guys think?

oh yeah, its session based settings for the templates, do not visit both sites at the same time or you wont see any difference.

- Edited By tarbash On Mon 19th, Apr 2004 @ 11:56:15pm

there ok.. nothing nice or standing out i like though.. semi confusing and both of them lack good color scheme.. looks like planetquake.com

carni wrote: there ok.. nothing nice or standing out i like though.. semi confusing and both of them lack good color scheme.. looks like planetquake.com

Well you see, our old site was chopped up into many peices, every little piece chopped up was made into a picture format, and when aranged onto the HTML format , the loading became rediculus. So tarbash has taken out all those chopped up pieces, kept some of them, and created a more simple website that will load faster and attract more people, since we had lots of visitiors that didnt wait till the site finished loading.He is basicaly comparing the Old Website of ours to the New website. The NEW SITE is the one with the grey background that covers almost all the site. He is not trying to show off our old site (smartass). Since its not nice ,confusing,and lacks a good color scheme (probly only for you), what would you suggest mighty know-it-all website critic instead of being so negative about the site?

Btw- AWSOME EZ-QUAKE SITE MAN!!! I mean its just perfect. You got an original yet artistic black brackground with the traditional white writing and a mizture of colors for the headings. The menu is just so organized!!! you even organized it in 2 sections , NEAT!!! I wish i could make kickass gfx like those man.

Not????????????????

- Edited By Thragg On Mon 19th, Apr 2004 @ 9:14:19pm

Thragg wrote:

carni wrote: there ok.. nothing nice or standing out i like though.. semi confusing and both of them lack good color scheme.. looks like planetquake.com

Well you see, our old site was chopped up into many peices, every little piece chopped up was made into a picture format, and when aranged onto the HTML format , the loading became rediculus. So tarbash has taken out all those chopped up pieces, kept some of them, and created a more simple website that will load faster and attract more people, since we had lots of visitiors that didnt wait till the site finished loading.He is basicaly comparing the Old Website of ours to the New website. The NEW SITE is the one with the grey background that covers almost all the site. He is not trying to show off our old site (smartass). Since its not nice ,confusing,and lacks a good color scheme (probly only for you), what would you suggest mighty know-it-all website critic instead of being so negative about the site?

Btw- AWSOME EZ-QUAKE SITE MAN!!! I mean its just perfect. You got an original yet artistic black brackground with the traditional white writing and a mizture of colors for the headings. The menu is just so organized!!! you even organized it in 2 sections , NEAT!!! I wish i could make kickass gfx like those man.

Not????????????????

- Edited By Thragg On Mon 19th, Apr 2004 @ 9:14:05pm

1)my ezquake site was not created to show off it was there to dl my mod.. i dont go for glamor.. i go for easy to recieve..

2)dont ask for critisizm if you cant take it.. and i dont know about you but a greyish purple is not seen as "nice looking" by the masses.. i gave my critisizm.. take it or leave it. truly pathetic when you lash back at ppl who are just doing what is asked of them..

btw: your sarcasm is unbelievable tacky to the point that id more prefer you jsut say what you dont like of me instead of use one of your useless antics ..

good day sir..

True carni. If you ask for critisim dont bitch when you F###ING get it. You are on the right track with the site though.

only useful critisim is constructive criticism . i guess carni's criticism was semi but quiet not constructive.

carni, greyish purple? are you using 32bit color? i might be color blind but i don't see a greyish purple anywhere. also, what is the confusing about the sites?

criticism, is it ever useful? yes but only if its constructive and i only want constructive criticism. telling me that it sucks isn't useful and it isn't gonna help me make it better, telling me that is semi-confusing isn't also that much more useful.

i'm not asking for criticism, i'm asking for constructive criticism or is it too much to ask?

Pengus: can i get a bit more direction? also which site do you prefer? the old one or the new one?

"there ok.. nothing nice or standing out i like though.. semi confusing and both of them lack good color scheme.. looks like planetquake.com "

its of a darker grey.. in fact id more prefer it a color not of so bland..

and when you post you have to expect all critisizm.. it is constructive, i dont think you understand what constructive is.. truly all it is is the person who critisizes giving information of his or her own thoughts of whatever is being critisized.. i never said it sucks.. in fact.. i said it was ok.. and the confusing part is all those random banners on the side but all of your pages with "material" on it in about 8 font in the top right corner.. and previousely you said "what do you guys tihnk" never did you say "i'm not asking for criticism, i'm asking for constructive criticism" so get your own records straight.. learn to take critisizm fro mall aspects of it.. id thought after maybe you reading thraggs little bitch about it you might understand my point of accepting it and moving on while keeping in mind everyone else's ideas to improve upon it.. if you truly are hinging onto my every word to the point where youd try to flame me over some useless few words that i garuntee you wont care to read then how about you just stop right here.. calm down.. and stop pimping things that you cant handle the result of..

its a hard decision but ill prolly go with the new one, im not quite sure why , guess the second one just isnt my kind of shape of layout :/

Well, the new one doesn't have an advert for drugs....

shouldn't the background be a bland color? i mean how much attention you want on the background? the size 8 font you are refering to, thats the menu. what browser are you running? in style sheets it got it as 10px and 16px. it seems to view fine in IE6 and moz 1.7a.

Anyways, carni i'm sorry for assuming that what i asked equated to constructive criticism. Also i'm sorry that my idea and definiation of constructive criticism[1] differs from yours. for now on i'ill take that into account and not expect constructive criticism. i'ill just expect criticism, constructive and non-constructive.

[1]Muse.widener.edu

- Edited By tarbash On Tue 20th, Apr 2004 @ 8:30:54am

Oh wait, I found a drug ad on the new one

self explanatory.. www.planetquake.com/ezquake/dd.jpg

- Edited By carni On Tue 20th, Apr 2004 @ 12:56:38pm

I was also going to point out that the site banner breaks up on uber RES like me and Carni are running - you may want to try to fix that problem as well.

Also...to tarbash. You can post as many sites as you want. Just because you find it on the internet, it doesnt mean the source is reliable. That could be some 12 year old from Nebraska. Make sure you have a credible source next time when you want to argue something.

Also...i would like to make note of a quote from that site on Constructive Critism.

"Constructive Criticism must be criticism and it must be constructive."

The humour should be self-evident.

-----EDIT

HAHAHA - Another note. Next time you want to create an arguement...don't just put the first site you find on Google. *dies laughing*

- Edited By DigitalPunk On Tue 20th, Apr 2004 @ 2:42:01pm

i like the old site!!

but i LOVE the new one!!

DigitalPunk wrote: I was also going to point out that the site banner breaks up on uber RES like me and Carni are running - you may want to try to fix that problem as well.

Also...to tarbash. You can post as many sites as you want. Just because you find it on the internet, it doesnt mean the source is reliable. That could be some 12 year old from Nebraska. Make sure you have a credible source next time when you want to argue something.

Also...i would like to make note of a quote from that site on Constructive Critism.

"Constructive Criticism must be criticism and it must be constructive."

The humour should be self-evident.

-----EDIT

HAHAHA - Another note. Next time you want to create an arguement...don't just put the first site you find on Google. *dies laughing*

- Edited By DigitalPunk On Tue 20th, Apr 2004 @ 2:42:01pm

unless i'm mistaken the .edu domain is only available to educational institutes and i'm sure the widener university is a good school. also google, like you said, ranked this pretty high up, meaning it has an important relevance to the terms, "constructive criticism". So DigitalPunk, unless you wish to dispute the creditblity of widener university you, can we agree that this source is creditable. oh before of questiong my reference at least, at an absolute minimum, google the terms, widener university.

carni- i'ill fix the banner problem, thanks for pointing that out. the font issuse i still can not see the problem. i'm using the almost same size font that moddb uses for this very post. they are using 11 and i'm using 10. also, assuming your using the font your using is fixedsys, there is no difference between 6 to 12pt. so can you tell me what font size should i use?
here is an example of different sizes of arial and fixedsys:

also carni, whats wrong with side part? do you have any suggestions? no isn't constructive enough.

go 24 font.. really i did have trouble finding the menu.. where the banners are should be where the menu is and vice versa.. the font is incredibly tiny .. and the bakcground is a spitting image of planetquakes which although suiting.. truly is dull .. maybe a niuce wallpaper of ingame shots or something ?

edit: btw for "credibility im 16 in massachusetts.." not southerner.. not quick to lash out..

- Edited By carni On Tue 20th, Apr 2004 @ 6:28:25pm

changed it, didn't go as high as 24. its now 12 and 18. this site is ment to be 56k friendly. i'm not sure if i gonna add any extra image data for the layout.

i like it!

Tarbash wrote: changed it, didn't go as high as 24. its now 12 and 18. this site is ment to be 56k friendly. i'm not sure if i gonna add any extra image data for the layout.

56kers ? :/ cmon guy anyone who has that needs to upgrade

then tell them.... not tarbash

Old one's better. New one looks like a Half-Life site. Crap. Oh and the 20 on the money is backward

KrAyZiE wrote: then tell them.... not tarbash

the idea is that whoever still has a 56 k connection needs to be resolved or ignored so he should make a better site..

It's a good layout, far more better than the old version. Looks more stylish, more clean. But the forums have standard invision board template

we got a lot of hits and people seem not to visit any section other then the front page.
this worries me a lot. the old site took around 5 - 6 seconds to load on my cable connection. the current site roughly less then 1 second.

I just clicked on it again and I couldnt even find the links at first (even after the whole ordeal over it)

Try putting spaces between the words and the "|" lines. That might make it more obvious.

Also, it seems sort of cluttered at my first glance - not sure what you can do on the layout to fix that.

---EDIT

Scratch that. Maybe it would look more function if you put the links under the banner add and put a small border around each of the new articles. Might make it easier to read.

That is probably the problem with people not looking past the first page. If the navigation was improved - It would probably receive more hits Still a nice looking site - just it is missing that certain something.

- Edited By DigitalPunk On Wed 21st, Apr 2004 @ 4:06:59pm