• Hello [name]! Thanks for joining the GMC. Before making any posts in the Tech Support forum, can we suggest you read the forum rules? These are simple guidelines that we ask you to follow so that you can get the best help possible for your issue.

Question - IDE Classic Style IDE

amusei123

Member
Hi! In terms of the KLM and GOMS GMS2 should be ok altogether. When it comes to the IDE's central window however in terms of both Hick's Law and Fitt's Law you can hardly argue it being sleek in any way. Also like mentioned before the representation of information in this main window has a quite interesting information to space on screen ratio one might call lavish. Without customizing settings and using the mouse by default GMS2 is quite a cumbersome IDE to work with, because what's in the central window is still essential to succeed making a game.

According to the software development of GM sticking to this UI/UX it must be they have surveys and data supporting GM users are generally satisfied with its UI and do care less about workflow effiency, propably targeting a more leisure time or educationally motivated audience than a professional one.
 

TheMagician

Member
Over the years I have given up on complaining about GMS 2's strange user interface even though it bothers me on a daily basis.

However, what really has reinvigorated my passion (and anger) is the release of the Asset Inspector with the new Beta version 2.3.3. I have been looking forward to that feature for a long time and this first iteration is so badly thought out that I'm really disappointed. I hope that my criticism on the Beta feedack thread gets heard but since none of my other UI suggestions for the Betas have ever been included in a release I'm pretty sure that Yoyo has their own ideas of what a good UI is supposed to be and that's that.

The only sliver of hope at this time is a small sentence in GM's roadmap targeted for version 2.3.5 in Q4:

Workflow Improvements - A new (optional) way of working in your projects that does not use workspaces or chains
 

JeffJ

Member
but since none of my other UI suggestions for the Betas have ever been included in a release I'm pretty sure that Yoyo has their own ideas of what a good UI is supposed to be and that's that.
This is pretty much exactly my experience. I told them that the chained workflow was a very bad idea long before it got official. And here we are. History seems to repeat itself. What is the idea of giving early looks if no one listens when we tell them the user interface is not good and even give suggestions to how it would be better?
 

GMWolf

aka fel666
This is pretty much exactly my experience. I told them that the chained workflow was a very bad idea long before it got official. And here we are. History seems to repeat itself. What is the idea of giving early looks if no one listens when we tell them the user interface is not good and even give suggestions to how it would be better?
The official explanation is that they have heard lots of positive feedback from the community.
(That was early when the open beta just launched. I wonder where the community stands now.).
 

JeffJ

Member
That's... Odd. I'm not saying they're lying, but I've never seen anyone praise it. Quite the contrary. And it would seem that the critics far outweigh the supposed positive feedback, since they're doing the seemingly quite significant legwork in offering an alternative.
 

YellowAfterlife

ᴏɴʟɪɴᴇ ᴍᴜʟᴛɪᴘʟᴀʏᴇʀ
Forum Staff
Moderator
That's... Odd. I'm not saying they're lying, but I've never seen anyone praise it. Quite the contrary. And it would seem that the critics far outweigh the supposed positive feedback, since they're doing the seemingly quite significant legwork in offering an alternative.
Could have something to do with game developers usually being occupied with making games rather than discussing aspects of an IDE's UI - unless they're sufficiently upset about something
 

JeffJ

Member
That's even more to the point, then, as in this case, it seems they are. It also makes sense to take the time out for the feedback, if said IDE's UI makes that workflow that much more cumbersome.
 

GMWolf

aka fel666
Could have something to do with game developers usually being occupied with making games rather than discussing aspects of an IDE's UI - unless they're sufficiently upset about something
That's a ridiculous argument.
That would mean all feedback is meaningless as it comes from the part of the user base not making games.
Therefore all feedback should be ignored.
 

Posh Indie

That Guy
The chains are absolutely pointless, for sure. If you are dragging your code windows so far out into a maze that you need to follow string to find them again it might be time to rethink your workflow. Not sure what was going through the designer's head, but this is a game development application, not a visual shader graph...

That said, I try to make the best of it. At this point in time I would be happy to keep the trashy UI if they could just make the software feel less like a perpetual Beta... I speak only for myself here, but I cannot remember the last time I thought, "I am confident in using this software". My first thought before starting it up nowadays is, "I wonder what new issue I will encounter today?" The fact that many of the new bugs that come up every new release are regressive in nature makes me wonder if there are any automated testing practices in place... (Example: In the Beta channel we got Inspectors... and somehow a broken color selection UI...)
 

TheMagician

Member
The official explanation is that they have heard lots of positive feedback from the community.
Let's not forget that there also was a conscious decision not to emulate aspects of VisualStudio - for ... reasons. Sometimes, when I feel nostalgic, I go back through these threads from 2016 where we tried to argue for a more "classic" editor layout but to no avail.

I just desperately want the Asset Inspector to be a productivity booster but from this first version it doesn't look like it :confused:
 
I have been wanting to give my feedback on this for a few weeks now.

No matter how I try to adjust my GM UI navigation, I always default to this since it is simply easier for me:

Look through resource tree and click on a new resource to edit.
Done Editing
Look through resource tree and click on a new resource to edit.
Done Editing
Etc
and then occasionally right click and close all windows because the workspace gets cluttered. I never navigate through workspaces.

ctrl+shift+f and typing into the resource tree's search bar is the only shortcuts I use into finding resources. I find Quick Access to be not useful at all and I know this can be turned off in the preferences.

So for me, workspaces and chains get in the way. I know there are key commands and stuff like that to navigate, but these never stuck with me as it was never useful to me. Multiple code tabs never stuck with me either even though I tried to incorporate it into my workflow. I find going through the resource tree to be much better in finding what I am looking for. I try to keep my resource tree super clean so I can easily find things.

I never used GMS1 too much, but I know that using that kind of workflow can get cluttered and unorganized fast, because whenever I would watch someone code on youtube when I was new to GM it was a bit difficult to keep up to know what they were doing because windows would be on top of windows. GMS2 solved this unorganization with chains and non stacking windows, but still, I still don't like chains/workspaces.

Removing workspaces and chains, and then when you click on a resource it would automatically go to code and events editor would be the most ideal workflow for me. Having the Recent Windows only displaying resources and not events/etc, would be much better in my opinion. It gets cluttered fast with events from the same object and you really don't need this to keep track of what events you were on.

I was excited for the inspector, but currently not anymore. I don't see myself using it unless it gets improved, but it has a few more updates so we will see. It seems like a good idea, in that you could select a bunch of resources and then be able to edit them one at a time from a list.

I am looking forward to the new UI workflow this year, and hopefully I will like it. I hear it is more of a edit one thing at a time sort of workflow which is my style.
 
Last edited:

YellowAfterlife

ᴏɴʟɪɴᴇ ᴍᴜʟᴛɪᴘʟᴀʏᴇʀ
Forum Staff
Moderator
That's a ridiculous argument.
That would mean all feedback is meaningless as it comes from the part of the user base not making games.
Therefore all feedback should be ignored.
I mean that there is always a vocal minority of users that complain, therefore it is usually incorrect to assume that if you only see some people complain, that must be what the majority of users think.

ctrl+shift+f and typing into the resource tree's search bar is the only shortcuts I use into finding resources. I find Quick Access to be not useful at all and I know this can be turned off in the preferences.
This sounds like you might want to use Ctrl+T. For larger projects (be it in GameMaker or Visual Studio), Ctrl+T and bookmarks can become the primary way of navigation.
 

Posh Indie

That Guy
I mean that there is always a vocal minority of users that complain, therefore it is usually incorrect to assume that if you only see some people complain, that must be what the majority of users think.
Agreed entirely. The issue here is that the majority are newer and/or just starting on their journey into Game Development. That is also how this software ends up derailing all the time (*COUGH*Sprite Editor*COUGH*).

We did finally get GML updates (I think that makes like... a total of 1 win for more advanced users?) which is great, but we're still missing most of the shader pipeline and some real form of parallelism.

Admittedly, it does look like they started taking the "Less Green" portion of their community more seriously over the recent years. It's like meeting up with someone you haven't seen in a decade; "There's a lot of catching up to do", haha.
 

TheMagician

Member
I mean that there is always a vocal minority of users that complain, therefore it is usually incorrect to assume that if you only see some people complain, that must be what the majority of users think.
I usually agree with this sentiment. However, it can also mean that users are too inexperienced to see long-term usability benefits of different types of workflows, especially once projects get past a certain size (which, let's be honest, lots of GM users never really come across).
In the recent mini-documentary on the development of Voidigo you could see the huge lists of scripts in the Resource Tree from back when each function needed to be in its own script file. Nobody can argue against the boost in productivity and project management, now that we can have multiple functions in a single script file. And yet you never saw large parts of the community push for this feature. It just got the occasional mention from certain members of the community.

Ctrl+T and bookmarks can become the primary way of navigation.
I absolutely agree. However, correct me if I'm wrong. Bookmarks are lost upon closing and re-opening a project, right?

Quick reminder - version which gonna be released in Q4 2021 will have workflow changes,
I am looking forward to that point on the roadmap more to any other.

Since I have found out that you can change GM's preferences in a way so that every object is automatically opened in a fullscreen code editor with tabs for each event, I am quite happy with working with code in GM. Unfortunately, some features are not adapted to this workflow, such as middle mouse click on a function name.
 
Nope. Already been discussed (many times). If GMS1 was good enough, we wouldn't have made GMS2 - and now that we have, we are certainly not going back. GameMaker: Studio 1.4 is still there for you to use and is included with the purchase of GameMaker Studio 2, so can still be used and it is still supported. If you have any questions about GameMaker: Studio 1.4 I recommend going to the helpdesk on the website...
Issue is that I way prefer the GMS1.4 UI and workflow but modules are no longer available to be purchased, such as the HTML5 and Mobile one. Not only that, GMS2 is wicked expensive for a user interface that doesn't play well with any monitor I have, us users cramped here in 768p screens can watch as the sprite editing window takes up the entire workspace when we want to do something as small as change the origin.

I also abhor the way the settings for windows in the workspace are concatenated to the top task bar.

I'm only asking for some small accommodations AS OPTIONAL SETTINGS. Pop out windows for one, so that everything isn't cramped in the 500x500 pixel square on my screen and I can use my whole monitor. I'm also annoyed at how hard it was to find a skin that color coded the GUI for ease of navigation, there's a Visual Studio inspired one that makes the entire UI far more readable at a glance. This was an issue in GMS1.4 as well, but solved with the GM8 skin which used bespoke coloured icons for all the resources.

Look, out the box I get that this works for a lot of users but with a little bit of organization, GMS1.xx wasn't the hassle people made it out to be. It seems to affect the type of user who tends to leave all their prompts and windows open far more than tunnel vision users, and I'm a tunnel vision user myself, never having more than two or three things open at a time.
 
Top