New Avatar Layout and Size Experiment Discussion Thread

YouTube

I’d guess 64x64 is the biggest/smallest size everyone would be happy with. I'd agree with bringing post counts back; the post details look bare without it.

Fatal Exception wrote:
Red Devil wrote:
Cuttooth wrote:
Red Devil wrote:
Cuttooth wrote:
Parkreiner wrote:Bigger avatars are rubbish, it's not what GRCade is for. Go somewhere else if you want to look at big pictures all day, like an art gallery, and stay the hell away from here.

wat

Are there really that many people who want to keep to the restrictions issued by Future back in 2002? Do you all want the forum to be slow as gooseberry fool too just to keep it the same?

That doesn't make any sense. How would the forum get slower by having smaller avatars? If anything, it'd get faster?

Old GR was really quite slow compared to here (occasional downtime aside) and people wanting to keep everything as close to that forum as possible when it was rarely updated in its six year lifespan just makes zero sense to me.

Fair enough. No one wants it to be exactly the same as old GR but I'd rather have post count and location back than a bigger avatar. It's not like you had to squint at the image in the first place. 80*80 does seem rather intrusive.

Not really, the panel on the left is exactly the same size it always was. They are far less intrusive than image sigs.

Or even image sigs with quotes under them, right?

True, but the new avatars are fine as they are, much better than the 125 x 125 or 200 x 200 ones some places have.

Cuttooth: The kind of guy who would knock down Big Ben and replace it with a large digital clock.

Every other change on this forum has been to improve the useability for users. Software upgrade, better tags, better servers. This is a cosmetic change and therefore isn't a clear-cut better or worse. So stop using that argument, Cutty.

I didn't like them to begin with. You know, the old 'change is bad' sort of initial attitude. Now I have decided to embrace this change though. I'll miss lil' Parry though.

Can people take pictures of the avatars messing up the formatting? The sizes were selected specifically so they wouldn't do that, and they'll pose a problem if it's messing up on some people's screens.

The avatar size restriction was surely put in place to keep the file sizes down and to conform to lower resolutions, for improved usability? I think we've been due an upgrade.

Granted, maybe 80x80 was a bit too much of a change since the old ones are now a quarter of the size, but I really don't see how they can be considered intrusive as they're pretty average sized avatars as far as most forums are concerned and I'd be happy if the sizes were kept. With something added to the blank space below.

I know some people don't like the new avatars, but we are trying to see what works best for the forum so if you wouldn't mind bumping the size up for a few days. We're trying to get everyone to around the same size, just to see if the somewhat inconsistent sizes at the moment are an issue or not.

You don't have to increase your size, but it would greatly help!

Here's one for Red Devil to try

Go on give it a go, you never know till you try.

Bigger is not always better. But in this case, it is.

JV wrote:Bigger is not always better. But in this case, it is.

That's what she said.

Jaxley wrote:
Dual wrote:
Ario wrote:What if we could hover the mouse over avatars to show a little pop up window with other details like post count, posts per day, member since date, gamertag or msn etc.

I too, approve of this suggestion.

Sounds good.

That's an awesome idea!

The Alchemist Penguin wrote:I know some people don't like the new avatars, but we are trying to see what works best for the forum so if you wouldn't mind bumping the size up for a few days. We're trying to get everyone to around the same size, just to see if the somewhat inconsistent sizes at the moment are an issue or not.

You don't have to increase your size, but it would greatly help!

Well most peoples' names are wider than their avatar, so it's not causing any issues. I often browse on 1024*800 (EEEPC) and the forum looks fine.

JV wrote:Bigger is not always better. But in this case, it is.

Begun, The parrot wars have.

Tiarny's name mucks up the formatting more than any avatar! Should we restrict people to short usernames?

If you lot decide to go back to a different size (which you really shouldn't), then at least continue to leave out post counts. They're pointless and it only takes a second to check someone's profile if it means that much to some people.

This is what it currently looks like for me. i.e fine.

This is officially the best new avatar so far:

I'm tempted to upgrade my avatar, but I've had this one since 2002...

Makes him look angry at every single post above his.

Could someone hit me up with a sandshrew or an Evee in the same style as RD's marowak or Alvins Kabutops? With the transparent background and stuff?

If so I would :wub:

you forever and ever.

New Avatar Layout and Size Experiment Discussion Thread

Who is online

Affiliates