I thought I was fairly concise in answering the question before it was asked lol.
Suffice it to say where you see practicality, cleanliness and orginization, I see emptiness and a general lack of adornment, also a fair bit of repetition and redundancy. Who can say why you see the one and I see the other though? I'm sure it's down to taste and a differing aesthetic sensibility. Just judging from our conversations in the hotbar thread (wherever that one went) it's probably safe to say we're coming at it from rather different perspectives and it would probably take more time to unpack the Why than either of us are really willing to put in here, though I suppose I can try hehe.
There are elements in the design I do like, the little lattices around the various borders for example. Those have some nice curves tying the panels together like an Alphonse Mucha drawing or something. Some of the icons as well though they're very small, but on the whole it just doesn't grab me like I wish it did. Probably cause it's mostly a transparency.
I can imagine this presentation used for just about any RPG, which is why it doesn't feel particularly distinctive or thematic for me. Too modernist and minimalist and generic. Doesn't conjur up the Forgotten Realms or D&D vibes for me. Just feels kind of scrubbed and stripped down and utilitarian. Like the Braun kitchen appliance of UI's -too sleek and too simple, where you can't see the buttons hehe. I get it, it's just not my thing.
I don't want to be too harsh, since to me it seems very unfinished, and I don't want to pre-judge the architecture based on the scaffolding here, but still. To my way of thinking there is a difference between outdated and timeless, also empty vs elegantly reserved. I like a vingette or sketch but there's a difference between that and something that's just incomplete. I mean I could waltz into just about any space and make it look practical and clean and well organized by removing all traces of the lived-in character and simply painting the walls white, but that's kinda like redecorating and reorganizing with a wrecking ball.
I tend to be more forgiving of the try-hard even when I sense something is a bit overwrought, cause at least I know they really tried and put some heart into it. I prefer a Piranesi to a Picasso though, or a Repin to a Rothko for example, so I know my views are fairly antiquated. When I see a cubist slant in Piransei or a color gradient in a Repin to me it feels more powerful, because it's in service of some higher something with greater demonstrable skill in the execution (which is the meaning Ars) rather than just reveling in itself as a solipsistic abstraction. I enjoy Rodin, quite a lot actually, but I don't think he was an objectively better scultpor than Bernini, and I'm sure he'd have admitted the same. When I see the reductio in art movements I can appreciate the essentialist point being made, but I see the same essentialism in opperation in earlier or more traditional works too, just with a greater sweep and sense of purpose there. Since they hadn't given up on the figurative element yet and can still function as visual language or visual metaphor without requiring interpetation by an intermediary to explain the merits or the purpose.
That's general art talk to be sure, but I have the same views when it comes to design. I will always prefer an original typeface or something lovingly hand lettered to something typed out in arial sans-serif. I just find the UI not particularly striking right now, it feels more like a template than a finished work with a signature. Sorry if that seems harsh to whoever designed initially or for those who love it right now, but to me it seems kinda bare bones in the cabinet, whereas I was hoping for a more of a stop motion Skeleton Warrior, in a Ray Harryhausen flick, swinging a scimitar! But I'm not the easiest to please, granted hehe
