Michael Sigler at Dragon Avenue has posted some design suggestions for the D&D site, aka Insider.
It’s not just about margins, gutters, grids and the like. Wizard’s web site should be about making a rich experience that showcases and harnesses the power of their content, entices visitors and is a joy to use and navigate.
I really like what he is suggesting, and hope that at some point Wizards can kick the site up to this level in terms of feel and readability. Anything I get out of the current site feels pretty hard-won.
I also think he did a good job carrying over the look of the design notes books and the minis boxes. Nice job overall, in my opinion.
Sigler's work was extraordinary.
For years I've considered WotC's site to be very weak (and yes -- it's almost painful to find some of the things you want off their site). WotC would be very well served dumping their internal people and hiring someone like him.
Of course, the quality of online material from WotC is a huge discussion in itself -- both what we've seen in the past and what we can (and can not) reasonably expect in the future.
IMO
I'd think a complete teardown/rebuild would be in order. If they are still thinking of $15 per month, that is a pretty substantial subscription rate for online. I know that that includes all sorts of content, but combating many people's predisposition of "online = free" is hard enough with an attractive, easy-to-read and use site. With what they have, I'm pretty sure that regardless of the quality of content, a lot of people will not want to pay to fight through to it.
Plus, they possibly could dump some of the table-based formatting in the process, which isn't essential, but might not be a bad thing.
Agreed about the price tag. I'm just skeptical about the ability of the subscription model to work for the site in anything resembling the current state. I guess it is pretty likely they will go for the patchwork approach you mentioned. Maybe a fix here and there will be enough, but I still think it will be a tough sell.
|
Michael Sigler at Dragon Avenue has posted some design suggestions for the D&D site, aka Insider...
Wow!
Michael's redesign is 100x100% better--the chief reason I stay away from the WotC website has nothing to do with other loyalties or anti-Hasbro sentiments (of which I have none), and everything to do with --
a) too hard to navigate
b) aesthetically unappealing...OK, it's boring!
...aesthetically unappealing...OK, it's boring!
It's worse than boring. It makes the company look bad.
Sigler's design is better in terms of organization and navigation, but looks amateurish and is graphically inferior. I mean, c'mon, a blog layout? What is this, high school design class? Sure, it's much, much easier to find the latest info in such a layout, but it would groan under the weight of all the articles and sections that currently exist on the WotC site. I'm no fan of the current website (except the graphics, which I think are quite good), but a one-page mockup like this would be a step back, and would not be able to handle the complexity of the existing site, let alone DDI.
Sigler's design is better in terms of organization and navigation, but looks amateurish and is graphically inferior. I mean, c'mon, a blog layout? What is this, high school design class? Sure, it's much, much easier to find the latest info in such a layout, but it would groan under the weight of all the articles and sections that currently exist on the WotC site. I'm no fan of the current website (except the graphics, which I think are quite good), but a one-page mockup like this would be a step back, and would not be able to handle the complexity of the existing site, let alone DDI.
That's true that it can't handle all of that in one but it doesn't have too. The purpose of your home page should be (and in no particular order):
1. To provide access to everything else you or your site does
2. Create interest in what you do and what is on your site
3. Give the reader abstracts as to what is on your site
4. Be easy to navigate/find material
You could argue whether the blog layout is the best but Sigler's design would be much easier to navigate, is much more visually appealing, and provides better access to relevant information.
Sigler's design is better in terms of organization and navigation, but looks amateurish and is graphically inferior...
Perhaps, but it's clean, easy-to-read, and offers easy access to the information people want. Everything else is secondary to those considerations.
WotC seems to subordinate functional considerations to artistic considerations.
Even if we concede WotC's art is appealing (a concession I'll not make), a pretty website that doesn't efficiently provide information is a bad website.
|
|
Sigler's design is better in terms of organization and navigation, but looks amateurish and is graphically inferior. I mean, c'mon, a blog layout? What is this, high school design class? Sure, it's much, much easier to find the latest info...
It admittedly looks like a quick-build using iLife '08, but the point is that it's more visually appealing and navigable than the current site. If it's professionally superior (the WotC site), but no-one likes it, so fewer than desired visit it as regularly as the company desires, then professionalism counts for very little, and other measures are necessary. As far as being able to handle DDI as a network, the homepage doesn't have to do that--a visually-motivating link to the DDI page would work well.
...If it's professionally superior (the WotC site), but no-one likes it, so fewer than desired visit it as regularly as the company desires, then professionalism counts for very little, and other measures are necessary...
I agree with you, but I think an important point should be emphasized here.
Sigler's is arguably the more professional website. It performs the function of a business website better than WotC's -- efficiently provide information in a way that reflects positively upon the company.
WotC's website is clunky and unappealing. The company succeeds despite their website, not because of it.
I guess I'm a minimalist when it comes to the appearance of the site framework itself. To me, it's a successful site to the extent that everything other than the actual content gets out of your way in your attempt to get to the content (in this case, text and art). To the extent that the menus, site design, and overall presentation obstruct the transfer of the concepts from the writers and artists' brains to mine, that to me is a weakness in the site.
I think it's pretty hard to design a site that doesn't get in the way, especially when you factor in that different people want access to different things. But if the obstruction factor is minimized, I don't care much about anything else. I don't want a picture frame so ornate that it blocks the view of the picture.