Infographic Eye Candy: My turn

24 April 2010 | 5 comments

So I talk a lot about infographics. Which ones I think are good, which ones need some work. But can I walk the walk?

Today, I ask you to be the judge of that.

Yesterday, my internship supervisor, Brian Crecente, at Kotaku asked me to make an infographic outlining the history of fighting games with commentary by Capcom. I went for a bright, bold approach using Kotaku’s theme colors and round photos rather than square. I’m not happy with the quality of the photo on the Kotaku site (where we get millions of hits a week, so it probably can’t be helped), so I’m posting it here, too:

Click to expand to full size.

This is my first time building an infographic that isn’t designed for the school or the Investigative Reporting Workshop, so I didn’t have to go for minimalism. I’m somewhat happy with the result, but excited to build more for Kotaku and cultivate my designing voice. So expect more of these in the future.

5 comments on “Infographic Eye Candy: My turn

  • Jess says:

    I like it! I love that you used round pictures instead of square, I think it’s a lot more appealing that way. The only thing I would say otherwise (and I’m not really sure if this matters at all but it’s something I noticed), would be changing the size of the images based on importance of the year. I feel like when you’re trying to show how the number of games has grown, plateaued and diminished you should make that visible. Maybe use bigger pictures for the years where the most games were released? Again, not sure if that really matters in an infographic like this, but I thought I should have some sort of opinion!

  • Matt says:

    I actually would have preferred the size be based on units sold relatively to other games in that same period. Or, more to the point, the more “important” games. Def Jam Vandetta was not very important compared to, say, Mortal Kombat which was smaller. I don’t think it’s a big deal, just something I would have liked. Good graphic though, I like the overall design.

  • Michael says:

    Some of those lines that shoot off of the main time-line aren’t lined up properly; one of them isn’t connected to to it at all, and a few go up too far into it. Also one of the circles is overlapping another circle a little too much, whereas where this happens in another part of the time-line they seem to merge perfectly.

    This is just nitpicking though, I wouldn’t have come to this site if it wasn’t a good design.

    • Lauren says:

      Michael: Good eye! Even though it seems like nitpicking, it’s important for me to hear. I had less than five hours to build that graphic and there were bound to be errors. I’ll try to fix them when I get a moment.

      Jess, Matt, and Jenn: What you guys are suggesting is that the content guides the design more closely, right? That’s definitely something to keep in mind for my next infographic.

  • Jenn says:

    I agree with Jess and Matt on changing the size. I would classify important as influential or ground-breaking, though. Cool infographic!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>