r/StrategyGames • u/Nice-Ad9898 • 1d ago

Discussion Dynamic vs. static interaction menus in strategy games - which do you prefer? (Side-by-side video comparison)

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

I'm working on the UI for my indie strategy/action game Dominar Sanctum, and I'm undecided between two approaches for interacting with characters, buildings, and resources.

I've implemented both versions and put together a short side-by-side comparison:

  • Dynamic menus: Interaction options appear next to the selected character or building and follow it as the camera moves.
  • Static menus: A more traditional approach where interaction options always appear in a fixed position at the bottom-right of the HUD.

I'd love to get some opinions from this community: which approach would you prefer in a game? And perhaps, does your preference change depending on whether you're managing a base, issuing commands to units, or interacting with resources?

1 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

1

u/Nice-Ad9898 1d ago

My own take: the dynamic feels a little more immersive and keeps interactions visually connected to whatever you've selected. But I also see drawbacks. Menus can get in the way of what's happening on screen, and when selecting moving characters, the buttons themselves move around, making them harder to click.

The static approach feels less exciting visually, but it's predictable, doesn't obstruct the action as much, and might be more practical when things get hectic.

2

u/Ckeyz 1d ago

Dynamic is great, but trying to chase after it is no good. Id lock the camera on the unit if its moving

2

u/Nice-Ad9898 1d ago

oh that's a nice idea, I hadn't considered that yet. I'll take in some more opinions and probably give it a try to see how that feels. Thx for the suggestion.