Further Supporter badge tweaks.

[ko-tengu]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

The supporter badge looks a little weird in many lighting conditions and arrayed next to the other 2D Unlit badges most users have as it's the only lit 3d badge in the default set.

Describe the solution you'd like

I think the supporter badge should at least be an unlit material to look less out of place in most name badges. I think this also matches the version in the user list UI best.

Describe alternatives you've considered

I've tried playing with metallic/smoothness settings on various lit material choices, and adjusting them can help a little, maybe.

Additional Context

No response

Requesters

Lu Zanth, Kulza on discord

[ko-tengu]

Also it still has shadows, it really should not cast a shadow.

[JackTheFoxOtter]

I honestly really like the PBS metallic look of it. It's pretty.

[ProbablePrime]

We'll handle shadows, but we're not making it Unlit. Its designed to be metallic.

[TisFoolish]

What about increasing the emissive values to or near 1 so it's still has the metallic sheen but doesn't stand out as much?

[Dusty-Sprinkles]

We'll handle shadows, but we're not making it Unlit. Its designed to be metallic.

the problem with it not being unlit imo is it makes it appear very inconsistent in different lighting conditions when compared to other official badges, which while the shine is nice, I think is a bad thing, I could maybe see having our cake and eating it too when material layers (#654) get implemented with some kind of unlit-metallic combo though.

[lxw404]

I think a compromise is to use something like Fresnel or a Matcap to achieve this effect seeing as in many worlds, the effect here is dominated by ambient light which makes it not look the intended colour. Fresnel would give the edges shine as if it were metallic and you have better control over its behavior, and with a matcap you can emulate the characteristics of any material and guarantee that it looks that way no matter the lighting.

Also as an aside: the 3D nature of the badge seems to be a bit wasted if it doesn't actually take advantage of 3D space (besides getting sharp diagonals which is understandable, however the badge itself is only being rendered as a very small number of pixels on screen anyways and the sharp tiny triangles of this badge's geometry will most certainly be causing a lot of quad overdraw which can be problematic).

Here's an example of what can be achieved by just a simple quad and a matcap with the provided normal map, and it is consistent across all lighting scenarios:

(Current on left)

[ProbablePrime]

@RyuviTheViali let's at least fix the shadows for now.

As for the rest, sorry. This design has been locked for months. I can ask the content team/chroma to take another look. But I'm personally hesitant to continue to touch it given how long ago we decided on the design.

[lxw404]

If anything, I do please ask you all to consider at least the fact that the mesh has problematic triangles at its intended size and that it can look exactly the same as a singular quad, shown in the example above, unless you intend to use depth to convey something that the normals don't already.

[ko-tengu]

It's ok if it's already decided, but even if we wanted a shiny metallic look, the current setup just looks flatly lit and very muted in a lot of worlds. It's less giving across the idea of a reflective gold coin and more of a weird grey circle. The reflective parts only really play on the rim of the mesh and on my headset/resolution in VR it mostly comes across as a weird shimmer on the edge even when really close. Maybe adjusting the normals to reflect light better along the flat body would get the idea across better?

[ItsAlphaNeon]

I personally love the matcap idea. Keep it consistent across lighting environments while keeping it a metallic coin, if we're not going to get an unlit icon.

[kulzae]

@RyuviTheViali let's at least fix the shadows for now.

As for the rest, sorry. This design has been locked for months. I can ask the content team/chroma to take another look. But I'm personally hesitant to continue to touch it given how long ago we decided on the design.

You can change the implementation without changing the intended design. Obviously there's many cases where something is intended and it just doesn't really work out that way. If it's intended to be "metallic" it doesn't literally mean it has to be pbs metallic.

[ProbablePrime]

Changing either is additional work on an already stretched thin team.

My hesitation is not often about how, but often about why, when and what. I'm perfectly confident the content team can take another pass about it. But I am hesitant to recommend that given our other priorities.

That doesn't mean never either, we can revisit it in the future.

[kulzae]

Changing either is additional work on an already stretched thin team.

My hesitation is not often about how, but often about why, when and what. I'm perfectly confident the content team can take another pass about it. But I am hesitant to recommend that given our other priorities.

That doesn't mean never either, we can revisit it in the future.

Understandable. But this is a very high visibility price of content. It doesn't seem like it is but people almost always ask what a badge they don't recognize is and this badge is seen above a large majority of the userbases heads. As such if think it's worth the effort

[JackTheFoxOtter]

@RyuviTheViali let's at least fix the shadows for now.

As for the rest, sorry. This design has been locked for months. I can ask the content team/chroma to take another look. But I'm personally hesitant to continue to touch it given how long ago we decided on the design.

You might want to also disable motion vectors, I noticed in desktop mode that's the only badge that has motion blur

[stiefeljackal]

My hesitation is not often about how, but often about why, when and what.

My suggestion to the YDMS team is to setup a survey regarding the current appearance of the Supporter badge. This is the best way to gather the current thoughts from supporters and to plan, if any, cosmetic changes regarding the badge. This was somewhat done to the first MMC Donation badge back in 2023 as there were concerns with its initial design, resulting in a totally different look from the final product.

Changing either is additional work on an already stretched thin team.

Most of us Resonite community members understand that. However, as what @kulzae stated, this badge is a highly visible symbol within Resonite to recognize those supporting the Resonite project. If the majority of the supporters have concerns regarding the look of the badge, then that is something worth looking into. The best way to measure that is by conducting a survey as mentioned above. Not only will the team get results, but it will also show that the team values the feedback and concerns of its supporters.

[kulzae]

Most of us Resonite community members understand that. However, as what @kulzae stated, this badge is a highly visible symbol within Resonite to recognize those supporting the Resonite project. If the majority of the supporters have concerns regarding the look of the badge, then that is something worth looking into. The best way to measure that is by conducting a survey as mentioned above. Not only will the team get results, but it will also show that the team values the feedback and concerns of its supporters.

Asking people to state what they prefer is going to mean that someone isn't getting what they prefer

I don't think the drastic change in appearance based on environment was intended and we will likely get a version that isn't so out of place but still has the unique qualities the team were going for originally without the need for a survey

[TisFoolish]

Asking people to state what they prefer is going to mean that someone isn't getting what they prefer

That's true regardless if people say what they prefer or not.

[stiefeljackal]

Asking people to state what they prefer is going to mean that someone isn't getting what they prefer

The same can be said about what is happening within this issue. People are providing different solutions to the problem, but not all will be utilized.

I am just providing my feedback on the matter and a possible solution for the team to gage what the supporters think about the badge. This is fair way to gather feedback for the team to take action on to tweak the badge in my opinion.

[troyBORG]

Changing either is additional work on an already stretched thin team.

How is swapping a material additional work?

This design has been locked for months

Locked in for you. Its brand new to us. For all I know it was designed the day it was released....

But yeah I agree, add some kind of emissive to it so it matches the rest of the badges. Maybe doing Matcap or something for the shine sounds like a good thing.

[shiftyscales]

How is swapping a material additional work?

Because it doesn't and won't happen by itself without some amount of additional effort over leaving it the way it is.

[ProbablePrime]

worth the effort

I agree.

How is swapping a material additional work?

As previously mentioned my concern isn't "how", its what, why, when.

This change wouldn't be that simple. We'd have to have a discussion as a team, rope in Chroma, rope in Froox maybe to get consensus on a new design, which we'd then have to process and receive feedback on from you guys. As shown above there are different ideas and challenges with what people might want to see.

So while the "how" is "convert" on a context menu. The what, why and when could easily turn into a week or more of work. With the end result still being that some users don't like it and continue to suggest to us various ways to change it here. Which we'd have to process, which takes awhile.

As a further example, Stiefel's suggestion of doing a survey is a great one and something that would be good to see. But do think about the time requirements for that.

So depending, on the what, why, when this could easily turn into a large project. I've already lost about 2 hours processing the feedback in this issue, and probably more with this issue occupying space in my head. That's fine getting feedback is what I want.

So please always think about what, why, where and when. those question words can often add lots of time to "simple" things.

This design has been locked for months

For us yes. I brought it up over multiple meetings over multiple months with multiple decision points, discussion points and repeated checks with stakeholders such as Chroma, Froox, Content and the rest of the team.

However, public discussion on the design has been available since January over here: https://github.com/Yellow-Dog-Man/Resonite-Issues/issues/1176 so there's "proof" of how long this has been in flight.

---

As previously mentioned, I will be speaking to the content team to ask them about it, But I cannot promise anything.

[Banane9]

However, public discussion on the design has been available since January over here: #1176 so there's "proof" of how long this has been in flight.

Well, considering the screenshot you posted in that issue, I think you'd have to agree that the current implementation of the badge very much does not fit that initial (locked in?) design in most conditions.

In that issue, you also said that the design was "completed literally months ago" (from January) when people gave suggestions. Further, you said that the team is "moving forwards with the current design, further changes may occur but they will occur AFTER this item".

Now it is after that item, it doesn't look as initially shown, and people are making suggestion on how to achieve the desired look in an easier and improved way. This, to me, seems like people have the best intentions, yet are slammed with what probably feels to them like a "no - and stop bothering us about it", despite you agreeing that looking into it would be worth the effort. For what it's worth, my initial reaction to the new badge was "huh, what's that new out-of-place looking, dullish olive badge?".

[ProbablePrime]

no - and stop bothering us about it

This is not my intention, please respect our guidelines regarding Neutral tone. If I wanted to say that. I would.

Your feedback is received and registered. I am just once again informing you that we might not be able to look at this for some time.

---

I raised the issue with content just now, Ryuvi will turn off shadows and tweak the motion vectors. They also may play with the emission values. But beyond that, there is little time that we have available to allocate to this.

Due to all of the above, the support badge might look like this for a little bit, until we have time to schedule some work for a full design revision.

[Banane9]

This is not my intention, please respect our guidelines regarding Neutral tone. If I wanted to say that. I would.

I know, which is why I prefaced it with "what feels like", emphasizing that this is likely how it comes across despite it not being your intention.

[stiefeljackal]

As a further example, Stiefal's suggestion of doing a survey is a great one and something that would be good to see. But do think about the time requirements for that.

@ProbablePrime I understand that, but I would put my supporters first. Without them, how would Resonite survive? This area is rather delicate because this affects your supporters in one way or another. That is why I made that suggestion. If you believe other future suggestions for other items will need a time requirement, which all of them do, then I will respectfully no longer offer any suggestions to the team and respectfully rethink my current donation to the Resonite project.

Also, my name is "Stiefel" and not "Stiefal".

[ProbablePrime]

I think we're getting off-topic. All work requires time, and all suggestions require time to implement. Please don't make us communicating timelines as us not wanting your feedback. So to your point here, you're going to continue seeing time comments on your suggestions. If that's a problem I don't quite know what to suggest. We can't operate without planning and time management. However, it is up to you.

I am a little disheartened, your idea is a good one. I was just pointing out that it would take some time and in reception to that I had you suggesting that you'd remove your contribution. That's saddening.

Once again, I have communicated the feedback to the content team and tweaks listed above are planned(motion vectors, shadows, possible emission changes).

Please feel free to continue making suggestions, but I am not going to be repeating this again. The issue isn't that we don't want to. Its a time commitment thing.

Thank you all.

[stiefeljackal]

I am a little disheartened, your idea is a good one. I was just pointing out that it would take some time and in reception to that I had you suggesting that you'd remove your contribution. That's saddening.

Never said I was going to remove it; I will just be rethinking how much I put in. My point is stating that "it will take time" does not need to be explicitly said for every comment said here. I have been in the IT industry for 12 years now with 8 of those years in InfoSec; I know any little thing will take time and planning. That goes for anything outside of that profession. I would just note the feedback and move on.

Since you sounded concerned regarding my previous statement, you can always reach out to me privately on Discord or Resonite.

Anyway, I don't want to go off topic. Thank you for relaying the feedback to the content team. Let's move back to the discussion.

[troyBORG]

guidelines regarding Neutral tone.

The tone doesn't sound Neutral to me, especially from Shifty at times. It sounds more like this is how it is now deal with it.

until we have time

I feel like we need more Devlogs since we only hear from Froox, Prime, and sometimes Agis. We dont know what stuff like Ryuvi is even doing. You act like they are busy doing stuff but what? Maybe have them post info or talking during month to show what they are doing or been working on..

[ProbablePrime]

Posts to DevLog are optional, the team are not required to post them. The content team are working on numerous items. I will communicate the feedback about sharing what they're doing though and suggest additional dev log posts.

[RyuviTheViali]

With feedback from this issue and discussion on it with the content team, I have updated the Supporter badge's visuals. The badge now uses the Matcap material with an updated normal map. The badge looks shiny and the same in any lighting conditions.