New Creative Review site
- Started
- Last post
- 22 Responses
- jamble0
my calendar says 2009, creative review's site design says it's 2003. Which is right?
- phatlee0
Its okay, doesn't wow me.
- flashbender0
that top navigation is a bit awkward. Maybe think about breaking out ABout, contact ... into a smaller text based navigation to allow you to have the main links in a single line.
- fatbot0
clunky
- fiesta0
This is a joke right?
- WeLoveNoise0
i dig it bigtime
nice grid system / colour / simple, easy to use
- KingPin0
do they ship to the US?
- Not_Just_Another0
I bet it looked better in the PSD...
- moth0
Not sure about the yellow hover thing - it's a bit too strong.
And I would move some of those top-level buttons to the footer - they don't all seem deserving of the prominence they're getting.
But other than that, i like it.
- honest0
They have a naked woman on the site!
- twokids0
agreed. as long as there are cute naked women...its ok by me.
- LOKi0
kinda like what they were obviously trying to do, but yeah... clunky. check the blog even... content fitting and legibility is atrocious.
- Stugoo0
agree about hte yellow overlay its a bit gammy, but i like the design... reminds me of http://www.computerarts.co.uk/ though
- The Computer Arts website looks absolutely terrible.clearThoughts
- rasheedwallace0
type is too big bruh
- Stugoo0
back-issues link is broken too
- 23kon0
i likes it. certainly loads faster than their last pile of pish especially the blog.
My eye caught that as an advert for Masturbation lol
- Stugoo0
why is it when you go to creativereview.co.uk it takes you to the main site but WWW.creativereview.co.uk takes you to the blog?
- Nairn0
The current graphic for the YouTube article is throwing me a little, as it looks functional rather than editorial.
On first glance, I'd agree with Jamble (it looks a bit like a [much better] version of a site I did back in '03 or so, colour scheme and all), but the more I use it and interact with the rollovers the more sense it makes. Interior layouts are decent too, and I don't know if it's purposeful, but I think the slight delay, focusing on the banner before the content loads in, is quite neat. That maybe just be the result of a slow ad/tracker feed or something.
It's just that top nav that spoils it for me, just sitting there all plain'n'clunky and html like.
There, that's what I have to say on the matter.
- mild0
oh
- brains0
I don't like it at all. Clunky, overly busy, and the jpeg compression on the thumbnails is shite, that's what I've noticed so far.