And as long as we have people regularly and actively arguing that there is no point there will be no point left. Dude. I am trying to have people actually work together and root for it if they think it’s worth it.
If you, as you say, really want change yourself and you want UX propositions to work then you are doing a stellar job in undermining your own friggin’ agenda, here!
If you are frustrated - welcome to the club. But in that case, please don’t put that frustration on others who are still trying to make progress in that area happen.
4 Likes
The question is, new users who come from other 3D apps and therefore find it difficult to get into Blender? Or completely new users in 3D world?
I ask, because in forums I am used to seeing threads like these (just posting this example because it is recent):
1 Like
If there was an instrument which could produce a sound equal to violin but would be significantly easier to learn to use, violins would likely disappear very quickly. There is currently none, and that’s where the the main difference from Blender lies. There are many pieces of software doing same or similar things Blender does in much more productive, easy to learn and intuitive manner.
So while there aren’t many (if any) examples of how to improve violin design or create easier to use/learn replacement, there are heaps of examples that things Blender does in frustrating, convoluted and inefficient ways can be done much better.
In fact, I have very hard time pointing at even one aspect of Blender that’s currently unnecessarily hard to learn and use, but comes with a reward for overcoming that difficulty in some form, such as efficiency. What I mean to say, in many cases one has to do things much more difficult way to achieve same, or even inferior results achieved in other software using much simpler and less time consuming process.
7 Likes
That is very true. I just think it’s wrongfully assumed that UX focus is always extra work for developers and that features will drag to a halt. That is what many of the replies are about here, that adding features is more important. But if you have to re-do an implementation, change something later and constantly backtrack, that’s surely more work.
To give an example: when I see so many discussions in dev threads about not wanting too many inputs for instance, I think the workflow lacks a step that has solutions that focus on the users. So devs can focus on just make everything correct, and let someone else decide how the user controls it, or takes the discussions with them, test it on users along the way, and iterate over it.
Something can be incredibly complex, but if you make 3 presets for it, a user can understand much more of it, surely not a complex task in itself. It can’t depend on one person though, it has to be in the workflow.
3 Likes
This is not a new message. It doesn’t help to keep banging a “YOUR SOFTWARE SUCKS” sign into people’s faces. If other software is so much better, by all means use the other software.
That’s a great idea. By all means, submit some presets. If you look at some panel and think “Oh, I think that X, Y, and Z as presets would really clarify things here”, make the presets and send them to the responsible module team.
1 Like
It’s not a place, it’s a way to figure out who to address.
It is difficult to try to compare software that only does one function with blender, which basically performs all the functions on the market in a single 250 megabyte suite.
But even if you start comparing specific software, blender beats many others except for features that may be missing, which has nothing to do with this thread. It’s hard for me to find a software that surpasses blender in usability and efficiency, as you say. Because besides blender has the advantage that everything is a single suite, once you know the program you should not learn it again. On the other hand, in other programs you must learn completely from scratch to simply have a basic knowledge of them.
2 Likes
I think I have not done the question correctly, the question was more like, given my answer, would you
think that it has no relation with what was exposed? (if you have time, this is not important, so you can ignore this completely)
This has nothing to do with that. Those criticisms were early on in the discussion… In fact, many of the modifier workflows now have become easier, not harder because of the changes.
Thank you for your support. If you agree that Blender should establish User Experience as a core value, then do you also agree that the Blender team should embed the UX process as a prioritized and resourced element for the product design?
So, just to be clear and not confusing, I’m defining UX design, for the purpose of this thread, to be understanding the current user experience and defining the pain points (for new and existing users alike), and suggesting alternatives which then can be tested and evaluated. Typically, much of this is done before final User Interface is settled.
And I define User Interface, for the purposes of this thread, to be the implementation of an agreed upon user experience using available user interface constructs like panels, buttons, icons, colors, etc…
To be clear, I am not suggesting HOW this is to be done, only that it SHOULD be done.
If it is decided it should be done, then the next step is the HOW– what are the resources? Where is the funding? Who are the volunteers? What is the definition of success? Do we wish to work on a customer journey to help us better understand our product?
All of these questions can be answered after we decide whether or not it is a worthwhile endeavor to prioritize UX for Blender.
If this concept of UX as a core value in Blender has already been discussed, and either dismissed or prioritized, it would be enlightening and useful for me to review the discussion-- if someone could point it out.
3 Likes
Yes, that would be a very good regardless if we agree or not whether UX should be a core value of Blender.
That in which you insist on suspending added features and prioritizing the UX experience generates a doubt about what you are requesting. Should the developers in charge of: Cycles, Eevee, Nodes and Physics simulations, etc. be fired, so they can hire specialists in UX things? Because I’m not sure there are resources to give them sabbaticals until the UX thing pleases every Blender user.
1 Like
Some posts were removed that were leaning too much toward personal discord. Please keep the discussion respectful and relevant, and please try not to take things personal. Opinions differ, and subjects like these usually trigger expressions of personal preference, which can lead to heated discussions.
I’ll keep an eye on the thread. If it gets too heated I may have to pause or close it, but I don’t think that’s necessary at this stage.
Thanks for understanding.
1 Like
It’s not a “YOUR SOFTWARE SUCKS” message, that just may be your misinterpretation of it. It’s just intended to disprove the fallacious misconception that difficulty of learning curve and use is always rewarded in some way, be it with the efficiency of workflow or output quality.
Your reply pretty much sums up the problem with this approach. It’s along the lines of “We know there are better ways to do things, but we’re gonna ignore them anyways. If you want something better, go use better alternatives.”
I am proponent of exact opposite approach, to strive for improvement in all areas, including UX, at all costs.
1 Like
Please read my message and precisely point out which part of it is personal. I am failing to spot any single sentence that would be aimed at Sybren personally, instead of the topic of the conversation.
Please try to cool down this type of tone a little, thanks.
By the way, I did not delete any of your posts.
Ok, I’ve edited the message, although this seems more of an issue with subjective sensitivity to formulation of a language rather than objective interpretation of if the conversation is going ad hominem or not.
I am aware.
Thanks. I’m trying to be as objective as I can here. My message was addressed to every participant of this discussion.
4 Likes