Graphics: Xonotic VS Nexuiz [WARNING: OFFTOPIC]

That's really cool Exitium, do you think you could make more of those? I btw made years ago the same with Nexuiz. I wanted to compare one of the VERY FIRST nexuiz releases with 2.5 :

Perhaps we can crowdsource this. What I'm looking for is similar to what Exitium put in the first post of this thread: a direct comparison between our previous official release (2.5.2) and now. The screenshots should be in the same orientation, on the "same" map, and using the same weapon. This (IMO) is a great comparison for people to see how far we've come graphics/texture/map design wise. That's why I'd like to make a blog post about it rather than a video (though a video is a fine companion) - people can peruse the finer details in the images because they are static.

Off the top of my head the following maps would work for such comparisons:

- Soylent and Xoylent
- Runningman
- Final rage
- Stormkeep
- Gasoline powered and Space elevator
- Dance
- cbctf and Newtonian Nightmare
- geomonetary and geoplanetary

Attach your images to this thread if you'd like!

I was bored, so I did a comparison.
...
Pretty neat, eh? I'm sure everyone knows that Xonotic graphics quality is better from Nexuiz's, but it's always nice to see same scene comparison with a single view.

Edit: Effect settings were "Ultra" on both games.

Your comparison is very misleading. It is not the "same scene." You are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic. The same scene would look more like this:



The image on the left is "Xoylent" in Nexuiz on Ultra, with gamma set at 1.2. (Note: I did not add in any missing textures, which would make it a nearly perfect comparison.)

I'm sorry, but most of the people prefers neat and good-looking graphics over simplicity and/or functionality.

Don't ever become a game developer.

Your comparison is very misleading. It is not the "same scene." You are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic.

Somehow you seem to miss the point. The last time I checked, Xoylent is not included with Nexuiz. Xoylent is a remake of Soylent, with the same layout.

By your logic, you would also have to replace the nex in the Nexuiz screenshot with the new "xon".

Anyway, I like the idea Exitium.
One suggestion for a comparison: In Xonotic, the impact sprites are now bent around edges (and complex geometry in general), unlike in Nexuiz.
i.e. :

Xonotic is awesome, everyone here knows this

I agree, many people here tend to have a weird definition of awesome.

Yes, Akari. It may be news for you but *everyone* has his/her/its own definition of awesome.

Xonotic is awesome, everyone here knows this

I agree, many people here tend to have a weird definition of awesome.

Yes, Akari. It may be news for you but *everyone* has his/her/its own definition of awesome.

Tell me moar!
o_O

Hi,

My first post here. I wanted to react to the 1st screenshot. Old Nexuiz HUD need polishing - no doubt about it- but NOT a total revolution.
I think energies here are wasted to reinvent the wheel. Here under , a picture with some notes written over the first posted screenshots :



So, In term of efficiency, old one respect more what I need when I play. I'm sure it's possible to refresh gfx of the old one with doing an eyecandy & glassy work without loosing the efficiency of the first. If you need help with mockup I can join on my free-time of course.

Hi,

My first post here. I wanted to react to the 1st screenshot. Old Nexuiz HUD need polishing - no doubt about it- but NOT a total revolution.
I think energies here are wasted to reinvent the wheel. Here under , a picture with some notes written over the first posted screenshots :



So, In term of efficiency, old one respect more what I need when I play. I'm sure it's possible to refresh gfx of the old one with doing an eyecandy & glassy work without loosing the efficiency of the first. If you need help with mockup I can join on my free-time of course.

That beats the hell out of randomly griping about the HUD and merely saying you don't like it. Think I might screw around with some of the things you pointed out in that shot.

Deevad, that is excellent feedback, but I think it belongs in another part of the forum. Would you mind replicating this post in the "suggestion box" subforum? It should get the attention it deserves there (although the designer of the current HUD, sev, is on this thread ).

Personally I really dont care about graphics (Its a nice idea to compare them, but the result was obvious)

Anyway, I think there are more iintresting things to compare (as balances, physics; the game feeling), in my opinion

Personally I really dont care about graphics

Enjoy physics then!

Hey Deevad, thanks for the input and visual representation of what you're trying to say! It's really great that you took the time to do that instead of just blabbing on pointlessly like *some others on this thread*.

But, i'd like to point some things out:

Firstly, we completely re-did the HUD system from the ground up. But, not just so we could have one single new theme... We made something called the "panel" HUD, this is where you can literally change everything about the HUD. You can have custom background images for the panels (HUD elements like health, ammo, radar, time, etc etc etc), move the panels anywhere you want, basically you can customize it almost any way you want. You can access the easy way of editing this by going to Multiplayer Window > Player Settings tab > HUD Setup button. You can also make your own config and images which are found in the data directory for the game. To see other pre-made HUD configurations, try doing exec hud_ and then hitting tab in the console, this will list all the other HUD configs available.

Secondly, we actually have quite a few major HUD updates in the works right now thanks to terencehill and FruitieX as well. So some of your comments are already outdated. Especially for example, terencehill re-made the score panel essentially, and we re-worked the health/armor bars and such a little. (Though, a new image for it is needed as well) Also, we plan to make the weapons panel only show weapons which are available on the map (or weapons which have WEP_FLAG_NORMAL, so tuba and such isn't seen) -- that would shrink the size of the weapons panel a lot. Those are just the updates which were related to what has been said here... there's probably more I don't know about, as well.


Anyway, to address your points directly: I definitely agree with you on the icons -- those needed replaced ANYWAY as we have new models for those, but 2D objects are better regardless of this. However, I really don't think there is an issue with the font there for the ammo display. I also don't think the information is really "floating" (I assume you're refering to the ammo) but this can be changed probably, as we can add some background to each individual ammo display or something similar... And, the corners actually are used up in the case where you pointed that out... Bottom right corner is for the notification feed (kills, flag pickups, etc), and bottom left corner is kinda used for chat and voting iirc such. Though, that can probably be changed.

Finally, I personally don't think that display is too high at all.. infact I quite like it that way.. But, again, it can be easily changed even by just the user for their preference. If the majority also feels that it's too high, then we can change that.

Samual, I think we should do two default HUDs for 16:9 and 4:3. But the current HUD has problems for both screens. It feels too high for 16:9 and the side weapon dock consumes useful space for 4:3.

I like Mircea Kitsune's ut2004 HUD.

I was bored, so I did a comparison.



Pretty neat, eh? I'm sure everyone knows that Xonotic graphics quality is better from Nexuiz's, but it's always nice to see same scene comparison with a single view.

Edit: Effect settings were "Ultra" on both games.

Trying to take the fresh naive look of a new player discovering Nexuiz and Xonotic, I don't feel obvious that he would necessarily prefer the right snapshot than the left one...
Probably because soylent had a high quality artstyle.
I don't want to be provocative in any way.
Am I the only one here to feel this?

Your comparison is very misleading. It is not the "same scene." You are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic.

Somehow you seem to miss the point. The last time I checked, Xoylent is not included with Nexuiz. Xoylent is a remake of Soylent, with the same layout.

My statement, "you are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic," is perfectly clear. On the other hand, I am not sure why you believe that the relationship between Xoylent and Soylent is some sort of profound mystery that you needed to explain it to me, even after I had obviously loaded it into Nexuiz in order to take my screenshot. It sort of looks like you were attempting to be condescending to me.

Honest people who want to make helpful comparisons try to make those comparisons as close as possible, so that distractions are kept to a minimum and the relevant distinctions are clear. People who are afraid that the distinctions may not be that significant tend to use excuses. Re-texturing and refining an old map is not in itself a unique part of Xonotic's appeal... especially when that map can be loaded into Nexuiz, too. If you want to impress somebody with Xonotic over Nexuiz, perhaps you should show a screenshot comparison of a map that has had a warp zone added to it?

Now, since Samual has indicated that he responds best to pictures of what people are trying to say, I have included the following visual aid for him:



Assume that the boob job (breast enlargement) is Xonotic. Having her smile in photo 2 is running Xoylent on Xonotic. Having her not smile in photo 1 is running Soylent on Nexuiz. If the boobs, I mean Xonotic, are so obviously improved, then don't be afraid to let her smile, I mean run Xoylent on Nexuiz, for an honest comparison.

By your logic, you would also have to replace the nex in the Nexuiz screenshot with the new "xon".

No. Taken to its extreme, my reasoning would dictate that the two screenshots should have been done without the in-hand weapon model visible, leaving only the scenery itself. However, as gamers don't tend to swap out models as easily or as frequently as they load different maps, I thought that Exitium was being fair about leaving them as they are.

Geez, calm down people. Who said that we're trying to separate the two aspects (game vs map) to begin with?

accident, I get your point: If we wanted to talk merely improvements in the map then we could load its older version (Soylent) and compare it with the new version (Xoylent) in the same game version (whether it be 2.5.2 Nexuiz or current Xonotic git). If we wanted to talk about improvements just to Xonotic then we'd load the same map and compare across different game versions. That isn't what I'm suggesting here at all. I want to show users BOTH of these changes at the same time, seeing as they both (the new map AND the stuff xxonotic-data.pk3dir.git provides) came as a result of Xonotic. Based on this I'd argue it is still a valid comparison; Xoylent simply wouldn't exist without Xonotic, and the same goes for all the other maps I listed above.

Seems like this thread have 2 different topcis. o.O

Anyhow, I'm going to reply to both topics. First the actual meaning of my first post...

I believe we're getting a bit off topic here, so let me bring this back to the subject of the first post in this thread: Exitium, I think this is a great comparison. By any chance would you be interested in doing more of these with some other maps/models/etc? I would be interested in writing a blog post about it for the front page.

Let me know!

Absolutely! It's actually kinda fun to see how things have improved - like taking photographs about the same scene a few years ago and now after a massive natural disaster.

Your comparison is very misleading. It is not the "same scene." You are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic.

Somehow you seem to miss the point. The last time I checked, Xoylent is not included with Nexuiz. Xoylent is a remake of Soylent, with the same layout.

By your logic, you would also have to replace the nex in the Nexuiz screenshot with the new "xon".

Anyway, I like the idea Exitium.
One suggestion for a comparison: In Xonotic, the impact sprites are now bent around edges (and complex geometry in general), unlike in Nexuiz.
i.e. :

sev is right about this. Xoylent is the "Xonotic version" of Soylent and therefore "improved" (note the quotation marks). This isn't comparing game engines how the things are rendered - it's about Xonotic's quality of graphics and textures etc. And sev, yeah, those minor graphical things are also good to point out.

And if I'm going to compare player models, how I'm supposed do that in that logic? Import Nexuiz player models to Xonotic and say "yeah, they're same, surprise!"?

I'm sorry, but most of the people prefers neat and good-looking graphics over simplicity and/or functionality.

Don't ever become a game developer.

I'm afraid that many modern games just sell because of graphics. Of course storyline, functionality and being fun are still big issues, but modern games usually sells themself just displaying graphics and saying "Damn, I look good. Buy me!" And people buy, experiencing "being fun" afterwards.

Let's take a couple of examples. Crysis (1) had CryENGINE 2, and it was a hit because of being a computer killer with graphics. Storyline was kinda ok, yes, but the main issue being hit was those graphics. And I didn't even like the feel of the CryENGINE 2 - it was damn "stiff", not smooth to use. Also Frostbite 2 engine isn't functional, but it looks damn good. Upcoming Battlefield 3 has released just one teaser about single player campaign and IMO it's not very unique (when just watching the video). It could be any of those MW2, BF or MoH titles. But tell me how people react: it's graphics... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zw8SmsovJc

Personally I really dont care about graphics (Its a nice idea to compare them, but the result was obvious)

Anyway, I think there are more iintresting things to compare (as balances, physics; the game feeling), in my opinion

Comparing physics cannot be easily done with pictures of videos - it doesn't make realistic picture of the game. How you "feel" the game itself, must be done by yourself. Of course it could be shown how one jump and gaining speed is done with different physics, but I think we have enough balance and physics threads...

Trying to take the fresh naive look of a new player discovering Nexuiz and Xonotic, I don't feel obvious that he would necessarily prefer the right snapshot than the left one...
Probably because soylent had a high quality artstyle.
I don't want to be provocative in any way.
Am I the only one here to feel this?

That's called "marketing". And I'm sure that most of people think that the Xonotics graphics quality is better than Nexuiz'

------------------------------------------------------

[OFFTOPIC]

if others feel like you do then they can - and should - speak up here as well.

Unfortunately for you, others who feel like I am gave up on Xonotic already and simply keep playing That Other Game. You won't get them to switch at this rate.

If you don't like remaking the "completely working game, which is going to the worse direction", don't play it or say something to improve it! Share the actual ideas, not just "I don't like it, I'm off".

And Samual actually said most of the things that I had in my mind.

Akari, I really do hope you get this point: Most of us like the current HUD and that's why it has been chosen. If you don't like it, it cannot be changed because most people wouldn't like the changes you like. It's you vs. many others. Just saying "I don't like it, change it, it sucks, I'm right, you're wrong" doesn't help anything. Deevad had good points and actual feedback, while Samual said his own thoughts and told the facts about being configureable etc.. That's how the things work. If there is some kind of actual good suggestion which others also like, then it's going to be applied to HUD. But if it's just your opinion and you have no-one who stands with you (or just minority), it cannot be done.

[/OFFTOPIC]

Loads of blahblah :O

---

Gotta answer with the new post...

Your comparison is very misleading. It is not the "same scene." You are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic.

Somehow you seem to miss the point. The last time I checked, Xoylent is not included with Nexuiz. Xoylent is a remake of Soylent, with the same layout.

My statement, "you are comparing Soylent to Xoylent as much as you are comparing Nexuiz to Xonotic," is perfectly clear. On the other hand, I am not sure why you believe that the relationship between Xoylent and Soylent is some sort of profound mystery that you needed to explain it to me, even after I had obviously loaded it into Nexuiz in order to take my screenshot. It sort of looks like you were attempting to be condescending to me.

Honest people who want to make helpful comparisons try to make those comparisons as close as possible, so that distractions are kept to a minimum and the relevant distinctions are clear. People who are afraid that the distinctions may not be that significant tend to use excuses. Re-texturing and refining an old map is not in itself a unique part of Xonotic's appeal... especially when that map can be loaded into Nexuiz, too. If you want to impress somebody with Xonotic over Nexuiz, perhaps you should show a screenshot comparison of a map that has had a warp zone added to it?

Now, since Samual has indicated that he responds best to pictures of what people are trying to say, I have included the following visual aid for him:



Assume that the boob job (breast enlargement) is Xonotic. Having her smile in photo 2 is running Xoylent on Xonotic. Having her not smile in photo 1 is running Soylent on Nexuiz. If the boobs, I mean Xonotic, are so obviously improved, then don't be afraid to let her smile, I mean run Xoylent on Nexuiz, for an honest comparison.

By your logic, you would also have to replace the nex in the Nexuiz screenshot with the new "xon".

No. Taken to its extreme, my reasoning would dictate that the two screenshots should have been done without the in-hand weapon model visible, leaving only the scenery itself. However, as gamers don't tend to swap out models as easily or as frequently as they load different maps, I thought that Exitium was being fair about leaving them as they are.

I somehow get your point. But Xoylent is the "Xonotic Soylent" - made for Xonotic in terms of Xonotic. Of course it could be imported to Nexuiz. The main point of my first post was "This is how the things look like in Nexuiz. And this is the things look like in Xonotic." They are NOT 100% same view, but it defines the state of Xonotic compared to Nexuiz. And while I have Nex and Xon (or whatever) in the same picture, of course you can say that they're different weapons ingame. But Nexuiz' Nex is counterpart to Xonotic's Xon. That's how they can be compared. I'm not doing any benchmark testing or scientific research, just saying "This is Nexuiz, and this is Xonotic."

And while you said that pictures about warpzones etc. "actual" new things should be done - of course! I was intented to do that. That one picture was about "Somehow the same map, look at the art, this is Nexuiz map and this is the same layout on Xonotic remake".

Hopefully you got my point.

I'm sorry, but most of the people prefers neat and good-looking graphics over simplicity and/or functionality.

Don't ever become a game developer.

I'm afraid that many modern games just sell because of graphics. Of course storyline, functionality and being fun are still big issues, but modern games usually sells themself just displaying graphics and saying "Damn, I look good. Buy me!" And people buy, experiencing "being fun" afterwards.

Let's take a couple of examples. Crysis (1) had CryENGINE 2, and it was a hit because of being a computer killer with graphics. Storyline was kinda ok, yes, but the main issue being hit was those graphics. And I didn't even like the feel of the CryENGINE 2 - it was damn "stiff", not smooth to use. Also Frostbite 2 engine isn't functional, but it looks damn good. Upcoming Battlefield 3 has released just one teaser about single player campaign and IMO it's not very unique (when just watching the video). It could be any of those MW2, BF or MoH titles. But tell me how people react: it's graphics... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zw8SmsovJc

I think you are very wrong. I'm not going to debate weather or not Crysis and the Battlefield games have great graphics. They do really I agree. But do people play them BECAUSE they have great graphics? HELL NO!

Crysis 1 had an awesome storyline, and it's gameplay revolutionized the industry with the new use of the nano-suit. The whole feeling to the game was excellent, where you could grab one enemy and throw it on to the next one or taking out a cluster of enemies by throwing a freaking vehicle at them. That is the stuff that made the game so popular! Do you really think it wouldn't have been a hit even if there was quake graphics?

And Battlefield. That game lives of it's predecessors! BF defined the whole open world army vs army FPS genre with Battlefield 1942. And guess what, it's still very popular! BF2 also has A LOT of servers still going despite of being very old now. I don't think the graphics is the major selling point in the Battlefield series. I think it's the gameplay, the squadbased teamwork, the major battles and the amazing maps! And everything is so freaking balanced!

Counterstrike and Minecrafts are two of the most popular games around and do they have great graphics? No, people play them cause they love the gameplay!

Shit now I've written so much I've forgot what more I was going to write -.- ....

* Nesquick is naked.

To answer accident, and close (my part) of this kind of derailing discussion (sorry Exitium):

Yes, if you want to compare a certain feature (bigger boobs), then all other details should be left out.

However, the idea is to highlight all the work that has been put into Xonotic by many dedicated people over the last year.
How things were when we forked off, and how things are now. Which is quite nice to see.

@Lee_Stricklin , @Antibody and @Samual :Thanks for the feedback. I will not re-post my picture on the suggestion box : as Samual explained : HUD presented here ( and so crits like mine ) are outdated. Cool news for the icons. I will keep around and read more and more about the Xonotic project and forum.

I'm a 'rocketminsta multiplayer mod' lover on 'Nexuiz-classic' ( my nick there is 'Artefact(thebad*sschoob)' ), I also started working at the moment with Akari on humble little gfx for the -=UFB=- server ; ( new flag icons and Vip HUD ). That's help me to become familiar with the project, files, etc...
As you do , I would like to take care about the future of this game. Xonotic fork initiative was and -is- great. That was the right step to do in the FLOSS world in regards to the Nexuiz commercialisation , and this for the long term. Congratz again to the author for this reactivity. But for a 'Nex rocketminsta' fan as me, I have the feeling Xonotic made a too important jump in the evolution of the gameplay. And actualy, to be true, I have difficulties to enjoy it and I consider it as a new different game. That certainly not the effect you looked and look for, as I imagine ? Do you think a server with a mod as -=UFB=- can run the same way with Xonotic ? and DTG ? etc...?

So, this HUD discution, is IMO, revelant of this more deep problem : relationship Xonotic<>Nexuiz.
I would really like to open a constructive discution on this forum and work to link the 2 projects for the long term benefit of Xonotic. It would be sad to have a second fork out there exisiting, Waste of energy and time. But for the moment the idea is making it's own way unfortunately side of Nexuiz-classic users.

How Xonotic team is positionned in regards of this problem ?

I'm sorry, but most of the people prefers neat and good-looking graphics over simplicity and/or functionality.

Don't ever become a game developer.

I'm afraid that many modern games just sell because of graphics. Of course storyline, functionality and being fun are still big issues, but modern games usually sells themself just displaying graphics and saying "Damn, I look good. Buy me!" And people buy, experiencing "being fun" afterwards.

Let's take a couple of examples. Crysis (1) had CryENGINE 2, and it was a hit because of being a computer killer with graphics. Storyline was kinda ok, yes, but the main issue being hit was those graphics. And I didn't even like the feel of the CryENGINE 2 - it was damn "stiff", not smooth to use. Also Frostbite 2 engine isn't functional, but it looks damn good. Upcoming Battlefield 3 has released just one teaser about single player campaign and IMO it's not very unique (when just watching the video). It could be any of those MW2, BF or MoH titles. But tell me how people react: it's graphics... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zw8SmsovJc

I think you are very wrong. I'm not going to debate weather or not Crysis and the Battlefield games have great graphics. They do really I agree. But do people play them BECAUSE they have great graphics? HELL NO!

Crysis 1 had an awesome storyline, and it's gameplay revolutionized the industry with the new use of the nano-suit. The whole feeling to the game was excellent, where you could grab one enemy and throw it on to the next one or taking out a cluster of enemies by throwing a freaking vehicle at them. That is the stuff that made the game so popular! Do you really think it wouldn't have been a hit even if there was quake graphics?

And Battlefield. That game lives of it's predecessors! BF defined the whole open world army vs army FPS genre with Battlefield 1942. And guess what, it's still very popular! BF2 also has A LOT of servers still going despite of being very old now. I don't think the graphics is the major selling point in the Battlefield series. I think it's the gameplay, the squadbased teamwork, the major battles and the amazing maps! And everything is so freaking balanced!

Counterstrike and Minecrafts are two of the most popular games around and do they have great graphics? No, people play them cause they love the gameplay!

Shit now I've written so much I've forgot what more I was going to write -.- ....

* Nesquick is naked.

Nanosuit indeed was one of the things which made Crysis popular. But IMO the biggest issue were graphics and being "computer killer". If Crysis gameplay and storyline had sucked, the game would have of course been charaterized as "good graphics, but bad game". Crysis 1 storyline wasn't really revolutionary. It was good, yes, but not unique. Nanosuit was unique and it was also one of the things which sold Crysis, but IMO graphics are the Crysis's "the thing" and how Crysis is defined. And throwing objects and enemies weren't revolutionary aspects, I think there have been several games before Crysis which work liked that. It's fun, I totally agree with you. And yes, I think that Crysis had flopped if it had Quake 1 graphics.

BF2 has been ofter characterized as "the best BF". While talking about newer BF games, like Bad Company 2, netplayers have stated that it's not so good multiplayer game like BF2. But the sales? BC2 solds "shitloads", while BF2 sold just "damn lot". And why? Graphics and destructable area? And being "rival" to Modern Warfare 2? That's why BC2 sold so much. I like BC2 as a game, but many people bought BC2 because of these aspects. I bet that many BC2 have never played previous BF's or even knew that BF-series is about big areas! BC2 had just good marketing strategy. And one example more - newest Medal of Honor. Gameplay was crap, story was short and crap, and multiplayer was "shitty BC2 and MW2 combination". And the sales?

Counter Strike is just popular because it's always been. And Minecraft is one of these rare cases.

And don't get me wrong - I don't prefer graphics over functionality and being fun. All I said was my thoughts about common people, which is based on how most people have written, or said or what they have bought. I play old PS1 games (now playing Final Fantasy VII) and old PC games, for example QuakeWorld, because I like playing these games. One of my friend stated, that he couldn't play FF7 because of the graphics (mainly block characters). This supports my theory - people look at apperance before actually experiencing the game itself.

---

And oh, btw...

omg this thread has run out of control! I can't keep up, sorry, I am out.

* Halogene jumps off the thread before it gets too fast

I think I should make a new thread... o.o

@Exitium: I was going to reply to Halogene's post with a bunch of suggestions on how to improve the current HUD, but considering that he is out of this thread, that my opinion will be invalidated anyway and that I don't feel like writing a wall of text right now, I will do yours.

If you don't like remaking the "completely working game, which is going to the worse direction", don't play it or say something to improve it! Share the actual ideas, not just "I don't like it, I'm off".

Yep, I surely posted "I don't like it, I'm off" instead of a detailed explanation of exactly is wrong with the HUD, which is supposed to give you an idea on how to improve it. This is called criticism. But apparently it's not welcome here, so I'll just quit it.

Akari, I really do hope you get this point: Most of us like the current HUD and that's why it has been chosen. If you don't like it, it cannot be changed because most people wouldn't like the changes you like. It's you vs. many others. Just saying "I don't like it, change it, it sucks, I'm right, you're wrong" doesn't help anything.

Again, you got it wrong. I didn't post this for the sake of "I'm right, you're wrong", I have tried to point out the flaws of current HUD for you to consider them and either tell me why they are not flaws, or accept that they are and fix them. Another funny thing is that the devs actually did ask "What is wrong with this HUD?" (see line 210. But the whole thing is actually a nice read), and now when I'm the one to answer this question, you basically tell me to fuck off and that you don't give a damn about my opinion. Cute.

Deevad had good points and actual feedback, while Samual said his own thoughts and told the facts about being configureable etc.. That's how the things work. If there is some kind of actual good suggestion which others also like, then it's going to be applied to HUD. But if it's just your opinion and you have no-one who stands with you (or just minority), it cannot be done.

It might surprise you, but Deevad is my clanmate who wouldn't even register and post here if I didn't link him to this thread on our IRC channel. What he has put into his mockup was influenced by what I tried to say here and on the IRC, and I can bet you would disregard his opinion as well if he tried to explain himself in words instead of a picture.