This is a good example of when animation distracts from the content. I couldn't focus on anything because there were a half dozen different things animating all over the screen. There's no intent or purpose behind any of it.
Is it supposed to stutter like that?
I don't think so.. Because of that even the video stutters here.. :(
Beautiful work, Petar Stojakovic.
Seeing sites like this receiving accolades makes me angry. This site is so bloated that it absolutely crushes my browser performance in any browser I view it in. I can't tell if the scroll performance is intentionally awful or if it's because it's taking so much for my browser to render the site that the scrolling performance sucks. Some of the animations are obtrusive and can be triggers for people with neuro disabilities. I have vertigo, and a rapid wipe or flash of content can send me spinning. Is the site nifty? different? creative? Yes. But it doesn't meet basic success criteria for a usable and accessible site, which is a dealbreaker. I hope we as an industry can be more considerate of our end users than we are now, because this makes me sad.
Well, that is definitely a strong reaction. We all have a right to explore how the web should look and evolve and making stuff like this helps us understand where we can (or shouldn't) take things. You didn't pay to use this website, you don't NEED to use this website, so I think its unfair to demand it behave in any specific way just because it happens to trigger vertigo or make you want to puke.
Not everything on the web needs to be accessible, nor should it be. That would compromise the possibilities for those of us who don't suffer from disabilities. Being someone who suffers from visual triggers you should be aware that this kind of content is out there. Demanding that it not be allowed is like saying people shouldn't make loud music because you happen to have sensitive ear drums.
Besides, if flickering/terrible scrolling/overboard animation is the sort of impression they wanted to deliver in order to market their "game", then so be it. I can totally see where they wanted to go with the aesthetic and want to like it. The end result though, as everyone can see, doesn't really pan out and could have certainly been toned down a bit.
If demanding that a website should be built in a manner that is performant enough to allow for an action as basic as smooth, normal scrolling behavior is extreme, this is not an Internet I want to be a part of.
The Internet was created to facilitate sharing of information, which inherently applies that the information be accessible. You don't get to be the one that determines whether or not I need to use a website – the individual user is the one who gets to determine that.
So, yes, the Internet should be accessible. Otherwise you further marginalize an already marginalized group of people. Your chief complaint about accessibility is that it will be a Debbie Downer on your web experience, when by making a website inaccessible, you're doing that for others. Heaven help us if we make life hard on people without disabilities.
Accessible does not always equal a poor experience. In many cases, something as simple as using proper markup can be all it takes to make a website accessible to a majority of persons with disability.
If you want to build a website that by its nature excludes certain groups of people from being able to use your website, fine. But that seems to be to be poor business sense. Why publish a site if people can't view it?
For reference, a vertigo episode for me can last weeks. I'm lucky that I've, over a 10 year period, learned to live mostly normally. But something as simple as one scrolling motion on a website can trigger a weeks-long episode of spinning, feeling off-balance and nauseated. I stay away from situations that I know will trigger me — loud noises and flashing lights (concerts) — when I am sensitive. In certain situations like loud movies, I have to leave in the middle in order to avoid an episode. Many people with vertigo have it worse than I do, and you don't understand how debilitating it can be until you have to live with it. A courtesy to people could be a warning that a site could cause vertigo, but I can understand how placement of that might take over the hierarchy of the site and be an annoyance.
I'm all for experimentation and innovation, but it's abundantly clear to me that many creators of digital products and sites are forgetting to design with their users in mind by covering basics like performance, and I don't want us to lose sight of building things for people to use in this process.
To be straight, I am not saying that I don't care about accessibility, it's vitally important. My position is that accessibility should not be the primary pursuit of EVERY project. In the world of entertainment, the team creating the experience can decide what their focus is. And confusing accessibility with performance is probably why we're off in the weeds here.
The point about you not needing to use this website still stands. This is a site promoting a game; you ultimately choose to consume it if you want to (or not) for entertainment purposes. If their site failed to load because of shitty development, or I couldn't read it because of shitty design, then so be it. Nobody should be outraged because they have lost out on an experience that they have personally (and arbitrarily) deemed they "needed".
In no way was I trying to denigrate anyone with disabilities, but demanding that all things web adhere to stringent accessibility guidelines is going to hamper the potential of creating ever more engaging experiences.
You even say so yourself "I can understand how placement of that (site warning) might take over the hierarchy of the site and be an annoyance". Since you're well aware of what triggers your disability, you are the one in charge of knowing when you're stepping into dangerous territory. God forbid you try on a VR headset.
If you want to criticize performance, go after the big media sites who's content delivery is so bloated with script which does nothing other than to serve advertisers needs. Ease up on the smaller teams who are just trying to create something enjoyable but happen to stumble a bit on execution.
Not everything on the web needs to be accessible, nor should it be. That would compromise the possibilities for those of us who don't suffer from disabilities.
Yep, I should have edited that, it sounds very polarizing. I naively hope people have common-sense enough to see the value in the point I was trying to make. It was in no way meant to be served up as "disabled people don't matter".
No, that was not it. By saying that a fully accessible web would compromise the possibilities you are saying that by providing accessibility, something that delivers content to people regardless of disabilities, you are making it worse for people that are lucky enough to not suffer from disabilities. The dissociation is the problem. The "us" and "them", that is exclusion. Accessibility is about inclusion. Accessibility is about the "and" not the "but". You are developing and designing for audience XXX and for people with disabilities. That is the crucial key.
If you want to be politically correct, yes what you say is true. Everything being designed with everyone in mind sounds lovely.
The reality is some things are designed to push stimulus to the extreme. Video games do not come with a braille equivalent and for good reason.
RIP the scroll wheel
I felt like if I were epileptic, this would almost trigger a fit.. It's insanely flickery..
Personally, I really like this.
The animation is heavy, but I think it works well in this case.
There are a few optimizations for the animation that could make it a bit less render-heavy, but I'll be the first to do a positive comment on this one.
Nice visuals and animations but this site literally froze my 16GB RAM MBP..
I lost myself in this animation. :/ that's too much animations for my eyes. :)
Super distracting animations.
Nice in places but the scroll animation makes it feel like you're falling through the site rather than scrolling :-/
Looks nice but reminds me of a Disney movie.
Looks like they use the same concept as BUX: http://getbux.com/nl/
My 2 cents
- The site failed to load the first few times
- The domain name intrigued me...so I was genuinely interested in knowing what this product does.
- First scroll animation made me feel like I have gone to the bottom of the page, so I scrolled back up...took a long time and got stuck. Refreshed again.
- If this was a long page without any animation...I would have paid attention to the content. I still haven't.
- Designs great! But isn't the purpose of a landing page to convert potential users and get them to download - If there is anything getting in the way of making that decision, then it has failed that purpose.
- Aesthetic seems to be given more importance here than the goal/purpose of this page.
That was more than 2 cents...
visually fine, nothing special, a very well executed design as demanded by the zeitgeist. Not creative, but just very well crafted, as design as a craft is supposed to be.
Though I absolutely hate the animation, im getting motion sickness from it, which is a new for me. And, what happened with the development there? The site stutters unbelievably,
Please cancel this awful effect where different boxes slide from bottom up, like green, navy blue, white, grey or something. This makes me fucking PUKE!!
I have no idea what's going on here.