New WotC Web Site Look

[buzz]

I have to agree with Reanjr, Joshua, and rowport here. I do really like the spiffiness of the site, but it's too wide. I'm running at 1024x768, and I need to maximize my browser to really see the whole thing. It's also pretty busy, a lot of it is low-contrast, and the HTML is not standards-compliant. Honestly, I was happy with the old site.

I nonetheless give it points for pizazz, and the Flash D&D demo is very, very cool.

 

[Karmacoma]

Add another vote to the “too wide, too busy and too disorganized” opinion.

My main problem with the new design is that it's too wide. My screen is 1280 pixels horizontally but I don't like wide browser windows. I'm not adapting my way of working with my computer to their graphical design department so I end up with a horizontal scroller. Oh well!

 

[Asmo]

As Mercule pointed out, there´s no link to the Greyhawk page.
I hope that they will fix it soon.

Asmo

 

[eris404]

Dear god, is it busy! I mean, I guess it's pretty and the boxes make it easier on the eyes, but I prefer substance over style - give me less graphics and more content any day. I also have to admit, some of the text is tiny.

Just to put in my two cents, as a web developer I still assume 800X600 unless the client says otherwise. Not saying either way is better, it just seems "safer" to me to do it that way.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I agree -- it's too busy. It looks like those gawd-awful computer gaming sites that cater to 14-year-olds.

Of course, if D&D is to survive, it had better start catering to 14-year-olds. Sheesh. I feel old. Give me back my text browser and Gopher.

 

[Dark Psion]

The descriptive text for the Mind's Eye and Product Spotlight are switched.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/features

 

[Trevalon Moonleirion]

Why is it that it takes no knowledge of the web or of design to become a web designer?

The site used to fit nicely in my browser. Now it scrolls off to the right. Web pages should not scroll both horizontally and vertically on a reasonably sized window. It's simple rudiments of design.

I feel really sorry for people running an older machine at 800x600. They can't even maximize the browser to fit the whole thing.

Wizards web design team is horrible. Maybe I should apply. I think they've got an opening...

While you're right about it being good to have a webpage fit nicely on one screen, you need to remember that you perhaps are in the minority of people with a screen resolution set so low. The Wizards' web team is probably aiming to please the majority, which to anyone above 800x600 it fits just fine.

On an aisde, it's interesting how my screen resolution increases with each new computer I buy. I remember that my first computer's default was 640x480 and if I switched it to the 800x600 it was capable of I was amazed at how tiny it was.

 

[Gez]

I'm too grumpy to like a new look.

I preferred the former, more sober look. Beside, I'm getting annoyed by the animated ad for Races of Stone. I dislike ads, and that's an understatement.

 

[mmadsen]

Add another vote to the “too wide, too busy and too disorganized” opinion.

And another one. Any decent web-page design will scale to any reasonable width. The new site doesn't. Also, why all the teeny, tiny text on colored, textured backgrounds? I want to read the text, quickly and effortlessly.

 

[buzz]

The Wizards' web team is probably aiming to please the majority, which to anyone above 800x600 it fits just fine.

Current stats put the number of people browsing at 800x600 or lower at about 40%. They're a minority, but not by a wide margin as yet.

What's more important, however, is that the percentage of viewers who deserve flexible, standards-based designs is 100%. The new D&D site commits no great crime, but it does become yet another site that eschews usability for presentability, forcing the user to adapt to its needs rather than vice-versa. It's a common mistake: thinking that Web sites are marketing tools rather than resources, despite usability studies showing that long-term success (i.e., repeat business) is reserved for the latter and not the former.