GameProducer Website Version 3.0, Comments?

I have read all the requirements about the gameproducer visuals… and even though it’s almost impossible to please everyone, I’ve done best I could to make the site look good. I decided to stick with the right-side navigation… at least for now. And the link color is dramatically changed to make it distinguishable… and to keep in line (as much as possible) the site visuals.

Now GameProducer.net got its third major update:
- Color theme back to orange(ish), with better distinguishable red links.
- Top banner much lower now, showing fewer links. Color change to black.
- Newsletter position changed (to top)
- Added footer (copyright information etc.)
- Added two new menu links: categories and donation option
- Added google ads
- Changed the search tool to google search
- Some minor other changes.

Here are the 3 layouts to compare:

Version 1:

Version 2:

and the new one, version 3:

I would be very thankful for all kind of feedback: Comments, Suggestions. All would be welcome. Tell me what works, tell me what is not working. What’s good, what’s bad and what’s ugly. Thanks in advance.

23 thoughts on “GameProducer Website Version 3.0, Comments?

  1. Juuso Hietalahti Post author

    Greg, Matt, Paolo, Dan, Duncan Sk8rCai, Cap P, Jake, jason, Paul, Rob, smat, kartones and others: Thanks for your comments. Your aid has been most helpful.

    I have couple of ideas (well – your ideas actually, not mine ;)) about what could be changed but if there’s not much resistance – I’ll stick with this layout & colors for now. Some minor changes might come (like better newsletter information).

    Don’t hesitate to bring up any ideas if you still have something to comment.

    Thanks.

    Reply
  2. Kartones

    In general is pretty beauty, but instead of black top, buttons & bottom, I would use blue/orange ones, like version 1′s top sections/buttons.

    Anyway, I usually read you by RSS feeds, but I wanted to give my feedback :)

    And what’s most important is the content, and in that your blog is a winner :D

    Reply
  3. Rob Mason

    I preferred the blue and white colour scheem. I like blue personally as a scheme, but I also felt it offered good contrast between items and backgrounds.

    As you said: Can’t please everyone, jsut make sure you keep up the really good content.

    Reply
  4. Makaze

    Overall version 3 all the way, it’s a definite improvement over version 2. But I have to say that I like the top nav bar in version 1 better than the current one. The black and red seem out of place with the cool left graphic and the peachish background.

    Reply
  5. Paolo Taje

    You divided titles in the header… good!

    But version 1 menu is still much more readable. You should try to enlarge red boxes or use capital letters.

    Reply
  6. jason

    okay the thing about safari:

    nobody seriously cares about safari. it has like 1% of the market and to take the time it takes to support something like 10 people who use it is pointless where you can spend time doing more important things. If more people used safari, then it would be important to cater to that browser but because people don’t then it’s pointless to fix any bugs or anything related to that. just use firefox is you’re using a mac.

    Reply
  7. Jake Birkett

    I’ll post before I see what others say. I like this one a *lot*. The first had nice colours and I never got into the second one much (too grey). This one returns to similar colours to the first one yet with different links and other things which work well I think.

    Reply
  8. Captain P

    The design doesn’t seem to improve. While the side-image and the light background color behind the site look nice, they are almost completely invisible (browsing at 1024 x 768). I think the ads mess up the layout there a bit. They also detract and mess up the color integrity of the site.
    The top banner and footer look unimpressive in terms of color, as if they’re not part of the site. The links in the top banner are too small ( I higly prefer the first versions button style).

    The red-grey colors are ok, at least they’re better than the previous version, but they’re a bit too neutral now for my taste. I prefer a warmer look. In other words, I’d still stick with the first layout. Why not offer them all, selectable, through some css trickery? If that’s doable of course… :)

    Reply
  9. Sk8rCai

    Hello,

    After looking at the new design and look at the old, I feel that verison one seemed to offer the easiest navigation.

    The new version seems to have a slight problem in rendering in Safari where the google ads to the right hand side of the page dominate and take presidence, thus squashing the image out of existence.

    Obviously you’re not going to go back to version one to keep a few of us happy, so I would like to make one suggestion and thats to make the primay links at the top of the page larger or give them their own icon bar of some sort! Everything just sort of merges together!

    keep up the good work,

    –CAi

    Reply
  10. Duncan

    I like this version. I feel that it is eye catching, bold, and readable. The red colour used for the site title is a little dark to be read against the black background, but the rest of the site seems nice. I usually get here via the RSS feed, so I only bother with the actual posts. I also ad-block, so whatever you do is fine.

    I’m using Firefox and nothing seems broken to me. I like the return to the warmer colours. It feels nice, overall.

    Reply
  11. Matt

    You’re not going to like this but I really like these in reverse order with Version 1.0 the best. It is more readable, navigable and delicate than the others.

    Reply
  12. Paolo Taje

    I still like the most the first version.

    Too many links on the right side… you should try to give more evidence to categories (recent comments, recent posts…)
    Top banner seems too small to me, bad readability.

    In Firefox I don’t see Google Ads, in IE I do and (the right panel) it’s awful.

    Reply
  13. Juuso Hietalahti Post author

    @Greg: I presume it comes from cache… try refreshing (or clearing the cache) and you should be ok.

    @Matt: ah… fixed links.

    Thanks for the comments. More?

    Reply
  14. Matt

    Hiya.
    - Google ads between articles is annoying, the use of light brown attracts the eye amongst all the white – but will probably be effective for advertising $
    - The brown is nice.
    - At 1024×768 in my browser, the top links (sale stats, featured entries…) break the multiple word links to new lines, which looks ugly-ish. How about making the table structure of the heading:
    “title/about”, “Newsletter stuff”, [new row] “links”
    and letting “links” span 2 columns, which let links slide under the newsletter box.
    - I like the short header, if you want it more interesting you could add a dark coloured silhouette in the black background. Might make it too busy. Hmm.
    - I like the right side nav too, as it’s easy to ignore when it’s not needed, easy to access when it is.
    Cheers, Matt

    Reply
  15. Greg Sarhadian

    Not all of the stuff work on Firefox, I have the latest and I the producer part of Game PRoducer.net is missing, the image on the right is blue but everyhting is the same.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Pro-Human Quiz: