Friday Flash Fun

April 30, 2004 12:03 PM

Bitkraft.com This is the best webdesign/use of flash I've seen yet... I just started poking around in here. (Via igiveashit.com)
posted by black8 (26 comments total)

nice!
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 12:20 PM on April 30, 2004

What Web design? Web design is HTML/CSS design; this is just another excellent example of why, no matter how talented the animator, Flash sucks for Web navigation.

Since the links to his samples are in the main Flash movie, you can't command-click them open in a new window. Since the main Flash page doesn't know anything about the browser state, it has to start from scratch each time you revisit the page - even if you're coming back from one of the samples. So, to see all eight of his Flash examples, you'll have to sit through the "Bitkraft" logo animation eight times. And if you turned off the music, it'll be back on each time.

The dancing Punch and Devil animations should have been separate Flash objects embedded in an HTML page; the "Info", "Notes", and "Work" boxes should be DHTML. Then I'd be a little impressed.
posted by nicwolff at 12:26 PM on April 30, 2004

still, all that curmugeonliness aside, it is a pretty site.
posted by crunchland at 12:28 PM on April 30, 2004

I really, really liked it. Even the creepy puppets. The general "antiquated" theme is really fantastic and consistent and the whole thing's beautiful.

I do generaly take exception to flash-based sites, but that one's great enough to get a pass. Nice find, black8!
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:56 PM on April 30, 2004

What Web design? Web design is HTML/CSS design


hilarious. read with simpsons comic-store guy voice for maximum effect.
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 1:31 PM on April 30, 2004

Maybe all he's got is scary puppets in the part of the brain where you keep your CSS knowlage.
posted by Leonard at 1:45 PM on April 30, 2004

Yes. The puppets were hideously scary. I hated looking at them, and I will probably have nightmares about them tonight.

That said, playing with the cannon was really fun.
posted by contessa at 1:49 PM on April 30, 2004

Flash sucks for Web navigation.

Well then, so to do browsers because when I'm filling out a form and I press the back button because I needed to see something on the previous page and then I press the forward button all the information in the form is gone.

Part of web design is using the tag to embed other types of media. As for navigation, it could have easily been designed with a menu that is available at all times allowing you to go anywhere from any point. Except it wasn't. Same goes for numerous web pages. Does JavaScript "suck" because it allows you to open up an HTML document in a window without "Back" and "Forward" buttons?
posted by juiceCake at 3:16 PM on April 30, 2004

Great site! Thanks for the link, black8.

And as for the hopeless debate over what REAL web design is, most of us realize that you gain and you lose with every delivery method.
posted by Rattmouth at 3:27 PM on April 30, 2004

hilarious. read with simpsons comic-store guy voice for maximum effect.

i read every comment in every post in that voice -- it always applies.
posted by Satapher at 4:39 PM on April 30, 2004

Hmm, my biggest problem is that it's a little too long for my browser (I'm at 1024x768), the flash games are nicely done though.

Here's a discussion of another flash site that is very odd to navigate but kinda neat.
posted by bobo123 at 6:19 PM on April 30, 2004

Geez, what's this all over the floor? Oh, it's the FUN y'all bleed out of everything!
posted by black8 at 6:56 PM on April 30, 2004

roflmyfbo @ black8
posted by Satapher at 7:02 PM on April 30, 2004

Well then, so to do browsers because when I'm filling out a form and I press the back button because I needed to see something on the previous page and then I press the forward button all the information in the form is gone.


If your browser does that, then I would say that it definitely does suck. Perhaps you should use one like Firefox that doesn't?

;>
posted by Ptrin at 7:28 PM on April 30, 2004

If your browser does that, then I would say that it definitely does suck. Perhaps you should use one like Firefox that doesn't?

Mozilla 1.6 not good enough? Do you have the magic version that records the information you've put into your fields before you've hit submit? Note I said "when I'm filling out a form", not having submitted a form or having finished filling out a form and hitting submit. I actually don't think browsers "suck", but by using the original line of reasoning, they would.
posted by juiceCake at 7:54 PM on April 30, 2004

GOT BURNNNED
posted by Satapher at 8:41 PM on April 30, 2004

All I'm sayin' is that if I start filling out this comment field right here, then hit back, then hit forward again, everything I typed is still here.

I just repeated the same behavior in Moz 1.6, for that matter.

Do you have a test case by any chance?
posted by Ptrin at 8:58 PM on April 30, 2004

Does JavaScript "suck" because it allows you to open up an HTML document in a window without "Back" and "Forward" buttons? - juiceCake

JavaScript doesn't suck; but if you use it to open an HTML document in a window with no nav bar, then you suck. (Unless all links in that HTML document close the window.)

There's nothing wrong with embedding Flash for self-contained animations - even interactive ones, like games. I said Flash sucks for Web navigation, not generally. But you ignored the rest of what I said anyway, didn't you.
posted by nicwolff at 9:59 PM on April 30, 2004

Example here.

Create a new account but of course, don't submit it. But I did forget to mention the secure bit didn't I? That was not very helpful. Sometimes I live far too much within my own context. Not that a regular everyday user would do of course...

I'm not saying that browsers are actually bad, but a browser is a browser and behaves in a certain manner. My point is, again, Flash is an object within a web page, which is within a browser. It is not HTML, but that does not make it not web design. Otherwise we'd better just get rid of the <object> tag altogether. Fortunately, we can choose to ignore web pages, be they HTML or Flash based, or if they should contain applets, etc. I can't stand Java through a browser but this does not make Java applets not part of web design.

All the elements that make up a page are part and parcel of web design. I agree with nicwolff that there are much better ways of creating a navigation structure, both in HTML and within Flash, and most particulary a combination of the two. However, this still does not place Flash outside the realm of web design. The question was, after all, what Web Design? Followed by a list of what is not liked. The same things can be said of a browser in certain situations and the use of JavaScript.

The navigation in the example site is not standard nor well planned, but neither is the navigation on a variety of web sites, though HTML sites do sit within a navigation wrapper, ie. the browser. That doesn't help when you can't find what you're looking for due to poor design. As a web developer myself I always advise HTML first and foremost, and Flash if the client insists, either intermixed like Bluetooth's site used to be, or if "Flash-only" in a browser window without a the browser navigation system.

In addition, within the Flash piece itself (and in the HTML version as well for that matter,) use a navigation system that allows the user to get anywhere at anytime so that they don't have to press back and forward buttons whatsoever, though they are free to do so.

Having said that I fully admit that the word desiign can vary in scope, as in the site was designed poorly from a purely techincal point of view. Even so, poor design is still design done poorly. However, I believe the parent post was using design in the sense of the look and content of the Flash piece itself. It created a nice atmosphere and experience, and some of the navigation options aren't bad, but some are, most particularly having to press a back button within the Flash movie. But then I regard that as bad having to press it in a browser as well.
posted by juiceCake at 10:25 PM on April 30, 2004

JavaScript doesn't suck; but if you use it to open an HTML document in a window with no nav bar, then you suck. (Unless all links in that HTML document close the window.)

There's nothing wrong with embedding Flash for self-contained animations - even interactive ones, like games. I said Flash sucks for Web navigation, not generally. But you ignored the rest of what I said anyway, didn't you.

No I didn't ignore it. But thanks for telling me I did. I do so like to be told what I've done. However, a Flash piece can be built to address all of your concerns except the right-clicking into a seperate browser window/tab. Perhaps it will evolve to that point. Browsers have evolved too.

Some very excellent navigation systems can be built in Flash that allow the user to go to any page within the Flash piece at any time. How the user uses the technology is key. They may use it badly (in which case they apparently "suck") or they may use it well. This applies for both HTML and Flash.
posted by juiceCake at 10:31 PM on April 30, 2004

i read every comment in every post in that voice -- it always applies.

After all these years, I finally get Satapher.

What Web design? Web design is HTML/CSS design[...]

Was that true before there was CSS, nicwolff? Will it still be true when the next Big Thing comes along, as we evolve towards Massive Omnipresent Bandwidth?

Flash may well suck as a technology, but kneejerk anti-(fill in the blank here) is lame, motherfucker*!

[*I mean motherfucker in an ironic, hipster doofus sense. I don't actually think that you fuck your mother, or anyone else's for that matter.]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:55 AM on May 1, 2004

CSS's first draft was distributed in 1994. (Shockwave was introduced in 1995 - not for Web design per se but essentially to migrate CD-ROM content to the Web.) Something like CSS had been known to be needed and identified as a requirement for development since 1990, although the idea then was to leave implementation to browsers. Browsers with styling languages were available in 1992 and 1993. That Cascading Style Sheets per se weren't really usable until, maybe, 1998 (about when Shockwave became pretty visible, for what it's worth), is owed primarily to a number of business factors, but however you look at it, CSS is not the new kid on the block.

By the way, I have no qualms about saying that someone who uses a technology badly "sucks" (in their use of that technology). (Certainly a gentler use of slang than others in this thread.) Bitkraft isn't just that guy's "lab on the Web, caveat emptor." It's set up as a portfolio site by a guy who lists interaction design at the top of his list of services. I sure wouldn't hire him to do that, although I guess I know whom to call for a small embeddable Flash movie the next time I need to create a "Can't sleep, clowns will eat me" vibe for a client.
posted by caitlinb at 12:02 PM on May 1, 2004

Sure, we can dump on the site, but I could build a FPP using the urls in the "curiosities" section of his links page! Check out Vintage Belly Dancing art , Posh vintage radios, Medieval martial arts, and Toshiro's mushrooms.

Of course, I can't actually link to the links page, since it's embedded in a flash movie and all...
posted by astirling at 6:15 PM on May 1, 2004

caitlinb, you'd do well to read a bit closer. his list of services is topped with "interface design", not "interaction design". similar titles, very different responsibilities. one of the things i do is interaction design, so i was immediately annoyed by some of the roadblocks in the navigation and so on, but as an interface designer, this guy is pure class. his style is unique and very well polished. he just needs to work with a good interaction designer to make the whole thing run smoothly :)
posted by dvdgee at 6:40 PM on May 1, 2004

I thought it was stunning from a presentation standpoint...in that it's beautiful to look at. It's theme is strong, consistent, very atmospheric and clever. I have the same issues with the navigation that others have raised, so I won't recover that aspect.

All that said, I'm glad to have the link in my bookmarks...because as caitlinb noted, you never know when you'll need that "Can't sleep, clowns will eat me" vibe.
posted by dejah420 at 7:24 PM on May 1, 2004

That's pretty embarrassing, dvdgee. So much for my fancy degree in reading. But the truth is: I hate the interface, too. The whole thing makes me work, especially if I want to get any info from it, and the little I understand about interface is that I shouldn't have to work. Also, you seem to suggest that nav is interaction and not interface, but ... really? Everything I've read says navigation is key to interface.

I agree that the production values, at least for graphic elements, are high, but I find the technique more polished than the semantics. That's mostly subjective, so I won't belabor it. Ultimately, this site has a surface appeal, but I find it makes claims it can't support. I think I'm done now, though!
posted by caitlinb at 8:41 PM on May 1, 2004