|
I created a forum for foreigners in Taiwan. I showed the site to some people last night. Some said that the logo (and design) has to be more 'attracting' or 'stunning.'
I'm not very sure if this is really necessary. Will this distract users from the important information (the topics)? Do users really care about how 'stunning' is the design of a web app? |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
Appearance makes a nice first impression. If it looks really bad, some people will think it's a spam / phishing site and leave. If the site looks kind of bad, but still has good content, people will stay for the long run. Content is king. Appearance is not. If you have time to work on both content and appearance, then by all means, do it. But focus on content first. Case studyEveryone I've talked to has said that Reddit looks like crap and Digg looks great.
Both sites do similar things and are laid out nearly the same. But which site do more people use? The winner is the ugly duckling, Reddit:
Besides appearances, what's the difference between these two sites? It's content. Digg shot itself in the foot with its infamous v4. It drastically changed it's popularity algorithm so no content that people wanted to read ever got to the top. It also interleaved ads into the main content, masquerading as actual content. So poor saps will click those ads and get led to spam pages. Digg v4 is basically a land mine in a dung field - you wouldn't step into the dung field in the first place and even if you did, you'll get your foot blown off. |
|||||
|
|
It sounds like you need to qualify the terms used in the feedback that sparked your question. Can you get those people to show you examples of websites that they feel are 'stunning' or 'attracting'? The aesthetics of an app or site, the way it looks, do need to form around the content, but they also need to fit the audience. Some audiences like more elaborate and glitzy aesthetics, some prefer something plain and organized, others want something stylish while still others love a retro feel. It's very true that some products can overcome bad aesthetics or even thrive on an ugly look, but aesthetics are much more than a first impression. They will support or work against the overall experience you're going for, and that is defined by the product's vision and the relationship with the audience. As Don Norman famously explained in Emotional Design, aesthetics are an aspect of usability, not something done after or instead of usability, and work hand in hand with the other aspects of the overall designed experience. |
|||
|
|
You'll always get feedback like that. The key is qualifying and quantifying the feedback appropriately. Opinions are useful, but just opinions, and one needs to evaluate ALL the opinions and validate them before jumping to conclusions. |
|||
|
|
|
Research has shown that there's a definite link between the attractiveness of an interface and it's perceived usability. It's known as the aesthetic usability effect and the underlying concept is that users perceive products that they find attractive easier to use than ones they don't. This is regardless of whether they actually are easier to use or not. The underlying thinking is that because users perceive more attractive products as easier to use, they tend to make subconscious concessions and overlook many of the difficulties they may encounter. You can find out more about the effect in this post - Aesthetic Usability Effect This brings to mind one of my favourite quotes, which comes from Shaker design philosophy - |
|||
|
|
|
It doesn't need to be flashy to be stunning. It can be very simple, and still be beautiful. So a web app doesn't need to make you go wow, but the better it looks, the better for everyone, as long as it doesn't come at the expense of usability. |
|||||||||||||
|
|
For your visual design, ask yourself this: what does this design have to do with Taiwan? How do the graphical elements you use invoke the feeling of Taiwan(culturally speaking)? If you were to design a forum on "JapanTalk" how would you do it differently, and why? If you can't answer those questions, then you were merely decorating instead of designing.
People, by natural like beautiful things. Of course this doesn't mean you have to make the design too graphic heavy. After all, for a discussion forum the design shouldn't overwhelm the content. I don't think the design has to "impress" or "wow." It just needs to be appropriate for the theme. Typically graphic elements have a very high diminishing return as people revisit the site. Your design needs to reflect the nature of the site a bit. Since this is a cultural based forum, I believe you have a lot of visuals(associated with Taiwan) to choose from. |
|||
|
|
No need to be stunning, but in the case of the logo it needs to actually work as a logo (make it more recognizable but kepping it simple). |
|||
|
|
