Message #1275

From: Andrey <andreyastrelin@yahoo.com>
Subject: [MC4D] Re: Announcing MC4D for Android
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 08:23:48 -0000

> I like your basic idea but remember that this would ideally be
> discoverable without instructions. I’d provide instructions but I have
> to assume that most people will not read them and simply decide whether
> to delete the app based on whether they can figure it out quickly on
> their own or not.
>
> For this suggestion, I suppose it might be made to work if there were a
> button with some sort of text that implies "For 4D rotation, hold while
> dragging" but that’s probably not worth the screen space. I guess it
> could be implemented exactly as you describe so long as it’s not
> required to successfully use the app. Those few who do read the
> instructions will find a treat. Similar to right-click options that we
> can’t assume most users will even try.
>
Yes, it was just an idea… Actually, for 3^4 you don’t need more that recentering. I guess that nobody likes to play with distorted cubes, and the only puzzles where I found 4D dragging useful were {3}x{3}, {3,3}x{} and simplex, with their small number of faces. So double-click for recentering should be enough.
>
> We’ve fantasized about this sort of "snap-to closest twist" idea before.
> Ideally this would include a stereo display and a data-glove or haptic
> feedback input device to more physically express your intent. Smartphone
> screens may be large enough for such a two-fingered approach. It could
> certainly be worth a try. The biggest problem appears to me that it
> could confuse many users who expect pinch-zooming to be the only
> two-fingered gesture. I think that a Z rotate could be added to
> pinch-zoom without violating user’s expectations, but it seems that your
> two-fingered gesture would need to violate user expectations. They may
> generally forgive the unexpected behavior but it is a risk.
>
In pinch-zooming you’ll expect that both fingers are moving. If one finger is fixed, it will be different command. Not a big problem for users.

> Wild thoughts aside, you
> could avoid adding a mode by instead pressing a control key to establish
> a center-of-rotation at the middle of whichever face center is closest
> to the mouse and then dragging that face with that key held down. Let go
> of the mouse or control key to "snap-to twist".
>
In tablet mode there is no ctrl-key… In desktop it may work better, but you will have to use keyboard all the time. Not the best choise.

> Yes but solving a layer that you can’t see would be a new challenge. You
> could attempt the 3D analog by solving one layer while keeping that face
> pointed away from you at all times. You get to look at the side faces
> but not the furthest one. Would the added challenge be fun or just
> annoying? It seems like this would be a close cousin of blindfold
> competitions which some people enjoy.

I’ve tried it with 3^3 just now. Easy, and not a great challenge at all. For 3^4 it’ll be good exercise, but no more. Unrestricted 2^4 will be better :)
But if you hide all stickers from the external layer, not only the invisible face, than yes, it’s an interesting idea.

Good luck!

Andrey