Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Spc One
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 00:44:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Spc One on 09/05/2010 00:45:15
| 0 m| | 523 km| | 5.6 AU| | 14.3 AU|
On TQ, it appears like this:
|0 m | |523 km | |5.6 AU | |14.3 AU |
Yes i saw that. I don't like the other way arround like it's on sisi now, i perfer TQ, it's better to look at. Please don't change it, keep it as it is now on TQ. Thanks. ____________________________________________________________________________ Angel 0/A |
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 00:57:00 -
[32]
I don't know new one is better for me but not for all people I suppose... So i think there should be a choice, old style or excel style in general settings it is the most obvious decision that i may think of... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
ihcn
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 03:43:00 -
[33]
I agree with the distance covering sentiment mostly. I shorten my distance column so that it covers up any units in the thousands or above, but i can still see the units for hundreds and below. It's perfect, because if it's in the millions you know it's km, otherwise you just look at the units.
to people saying to just get used to it, this isnt "SOMETHING CHANGED AND I DONT LIKE IT", this is an issue that's going to force people to make their overviews wider, which is just more annoying.
|
flinty husk
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 04:21:00 -
[34]
This didn't need changing considering all the other bugs in the overview you could have spent time on. If you must do this at least give us the option to decide which way it's justified.
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 07:08:00 -
[35]
Originally by: flinty husk This didn't need changing considering all the other bugs in the overview you could have spent time on. If you must do this at least give us the option to decide which way it's justified.
This, very much this!!
Prioritizing of tasks appears to be strange. Like someone tries to find tasks that can be done with the available development time, instead of finding development time for the tasks that need to be done.
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 07:27:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Ban Doga Prioritizing of tasks appears to be strange. Like someone tries to find tasks that can be done with the available development time, instead of finding development time for the tasks that need to be done.
Haven't heard this better expressed yet, this is exactly what it appears to be!
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 07:58:00 -
[37]
Originally by: ihcn to people saying to just get used to it, this isnt "SOMETHING CHANGED AND I DONT LIKE IT", this is an issue that's going to force people to make their overviews wider, which is just more annoying.
See the bolded parts... Isn't that just about the same thing? "I don't like it" == "I find it annoying"
There are many things i don't like about the overview, at least for once they did something with it and actually made an improvement i hadn't thought of until i saw it and was like "oh... OH!"
Also, see my previous post on giving the user full control over his own UI before you go "BAAAW, you are not seeing the point. I want options" At least to me, this is better the way it is.
Originally by: Catari Taga
Originally by: Ban Doga Prioritizing of tasks appears to be strange. Like someone tries to find tasks that can be done with the available development time, instead of finding development time for the tasks that need to be done.
Haven't heard this better expressed yet, this is exactly what it appears to be!
Wait wait wait... Are you saying this change took them a lot of valuable time that they could have spent on rewriting the code on how the overview sorts itself or fixing the bug where items not even in the same solarsystem gets stuck on the overview?
Let me tell you just how much time they spent on changing it from left to right justified:
overview.columns[1].justification = LEFT_JUSTIFY; This was changed to...
overview.columns[1].justification = RIGHT_JUSTIFY;
It must have taken them a whole friggin' day to make that change. Too bad they spent an entire day on this when fixing a bug/adding a whole new feature/changing the way something works in code is just as a small change.
I bet they have code in the overview class that does this...
if (rand(100) == area.51) { overview.displayMode = BUGGED_TO_HELL; } And fixing that would be as easy as doing...
if (rand(100) == area.51) { overview.displayMode = SLIGHTLY_LESS_BUGGED; }
Enjoy!
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Aera Aiana
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 08:01:00 -
[38]
Wow, a change that is in line with the Windows Interface Guidelines!? What the hell, did Iceland just melt and hell froze over?
Seriously, good job CCP! Now how about autosizing columns? That would be really, really neat!
Also, sometimes the numbers are really long (especially when using KM), any chance to shorten those a bit, i.e. like "2.9M KM" instead of "2,930,663 KM"? -
|
Pankas Carter
Photon Technologies Obsidian Order.
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 08:21:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Aera Aiana Wow, a change that is in line with the Windows Interface Guidelines!? What the hell, did Iceland just melt and hell froze over?
Seriously, good job CCP! Now how about autosizing columns? That would be really, really neat!
Also, sometimes the numbers are really long (especially when using KM), any chance to shorten those a bit, i.e. like "2.9M KM" instead of "2,930,663 KM"?
You can take the Windows "Guidelines" and shove em you know where.
Please, consider making this a toggle.
-- (start sig) --
Quote: A great city is not to be confounded with a populous one. - Aristotle
|
Siiee
Recycled Heroes
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 08:44:00 -
[40]
Yes, please prioritize the least significant digit for display. It makes it easier to read which is the most important thing about the overview.
|
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 10:00:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Cadde
Originally by: Catari Taga
Originally by: Ban Doga Prioritizing of tasks appears to be strange. Like someone tries to find tasks that can be done with the available development time, instead of finding development time for the tasks that need to be done.
Haven't heard this better expressed yet, this is exactly what it appears to be!
Wait wait wait... Are you saying this change took them a lot of valuable time that they could have spent on rewriting the code on how the overview sorts itself or fixing the bug where items not even in the same solarsystem gets stuck on the overview?
Erm, no. I was not saying this and I wonder how you could even come up with that thought? There have been no assumptions or guesses about the time spent on this.
But you seem to think wasting a little time is okay, only wasting a lot of time is a problem. I think that is the source for our disagreement on this issue.
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 12:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Ban Doga
Erm, no. I was not saying this and I wonder how you could even come up with that thought? There have been no assumptions or guesses about the time spent on this.
But you seem to think wasting a little time is okay, only wasting a lot of time is a problem. I think that is the source for our disagreement on this issue.
I came up with that thought because your post responded to someone who said they should have spent TIME on something better than "this". Where you then agreed with said poster and then that other dude complemented you for your ability to express how CCP is or isn't doing stuff and stuff and all those three posts forced my hand.
I am pretty sure CCP spent time in a similar fashion to this small change.
"Urr, shouldn't the distance column be right justified so it's easier to read the distance to certain objects in the overview?" -"Yarr i suppose it should" "Ok, then can i change it?" -"Please do"
1 minute later after opening the appropriate file and scrolling to the block that handles drawing of the overview. Changing "left justify" to "right justify" the change has been made. The reason that change could be made to begin with is that it took almost no time at all to make happen.
However, an option just for the sake of this change would take quite some extra time as you have to add setting variables, add the option to the settings window and code a condition to show either left or right justify. After that, when closing the client it has to be saved to the settings file which may or may not require even more code where settings are to be saved. (That all depends on how they deal with settings to begin with) Finally it has to be tested in it's entirety by QA.
This small change on the other hand requires no more code than switching "left" for "right" and then it becomes a matter of what the game designers think while they weigh in the thoughts of the players.
I for one say it's a good change. But also at the same time i want to see a UI that we can control in whatever way we want for cases like this one. That doesn't mean you get a checkbox for every little bit and piece of the UI. It means you get full control over every element in the UI through XML or other means.
In the end, your notion on them "wasting" time remains INCORRECT because the change was so simple it probably took them no more than 3 minutes from putting it forward to the change being made. If there was even the slightest chance it would be complicated to change it (like adding a setting for those who might disagree with the change) it wouldn't have been done to begin with. That also applies to fixing all the bugs in the overview. There isn't enough time to fix all the bugs in the overview and if you knew anything about development you would already know that if they where to spend those 3 minutes on trying to fix any bug it would probably introduce more bugs in the end.
Fixing something that is bugged requires more than 3 minutes and there is nothing you can say to make them fix it instead of making a change that they saw could be made painlessly in a very short time.
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 13:23:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Ban Doga on 09/05/2010 13:26:13
Originally by: Cadde
Wait wait wait... Are you saying this change took them a lot of valuable time that they could have spent on rewriting the code on how the overview sorts itself or fixing the bug where items not even in the same solarsystem gets stuck on the overview?
Originally by: Cadde
Originally by: Ban Doga
Erm, no. I was not saying this and I wonder how you could even come up with that thought? There have been no assumptions or guesses about the time spent on this.
But you seem to think wasting a little time is okay, only wasting a lot of time is a problem. I think that is the source for our disagreement on this issue.
I came up with that thought because your post responded to someone who said they should have spent TIME on something better than "this". Where you then agreed with said poster and then that other dude complemented you for your ability to express how CCP is or isn't doing stuff and stuff and all those three posts forced my hand.
I am pretty sure CCP spent time in a similar fashion to this small change.
I underlined the important parts here: I was never talking about how much time this change took. And the post I replied to also didn't make any statements about how much time was spent.
So why did you suddenly imply I said they waste a lot of time?
Besides that: I am absoultely sure you can find literally thousands of things of that magnitude and keep a person occupied for weeks doing nothing but changing things that can be changed because "the reason that change could be made to begin with is that it took almost no time at all to make happen." (Seriously why kind of justification for a change is that?!)
Yet this completely ignores the impact of those changes and effectively just creates useless business. The real issue here is "means" and "end".
Using effort to cause an irrelevant change is a waste. You can keep arguing how small the waste is but that does not change that it is still a waste.
*EDIT*:
Originally by: Cadde
...if you knew anything about development you would already know that if they where to spend those 3 minutes on trying to fix any bug it would probably introduce more bugs in the end.
I forgot to say "thanks" for that. Always good to see people referring to personal attacks to show how correct their arguments are.
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 22:10:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Ban Doga Post defending himself while completely ignoring the reality of development.
You are forgetting a vital part of the reason as to why nobody is sitting down fixing all these errors in the overview or the GUI as a whole...
It hasn't been assigned to the developers. (yet)
Let's look at what an hour can look like in a devs world. Given... Everybody is different and have different tasks to complete but this will hopefully make you realize why time is so important and wasting time... Be it wasting LOTS of time or just a few seconds of time isn't really applicable to the current situation.
08:00 | Start work on planetary interaction. Namely making sure that customs offices show up in the overview and is sorted properly. (Should take 2 hours max) 09:45 | Work finished early, the programmer takes time to go through the code and test it once again just to make sure it all works. 09:56 | Said dev notices that seeing if a planet/customs office/station etc etc is X meters/kilometers/au away on the overview would be easier to do if the column was right justified. 09:57 | Ask scrum leader if the change should be made. 09:58 | Open the relevant file, make the change. 10:00 | The distance columns are now right justified. NEXT TASK. 10:00 | Planetary interaction, try reducing the number of click required to set up an extractor and route the produce. (Should take 30 minutes max) 10:05 | Several ideas have been thought trough, one is allow holding down the CTRL key on the keyboard to create new links. The other is allow double clicking on a resource extraction interval after survey. When done take the UI to the product tab. In here allow the user to double click the product to crate a route without clicking the "Create Route" button. 10:08 | CTRL + click links implemented. 10:15 | Double click resource to select said resource. (The dev was forced to talk to the UI guy who made the PI UI on how to properly bypass the button and how to handle double clicks) 10:20 | Double click product to create route implemented. 10:28 | Initial testing done, apply to master trunk. SISI testing and QA will should spot any bugs. 10:30 | NEXT TASK (Something to do with PI. Should take one hour) 11:30 | NEXT TASK ASSIGNED (Something to do with PI. Should take two hours... But lunch is coming up at 12:00 so wait until after lunch before implementing it) 11:37 | Initial layout for task done, scribble down notes. 11:45 | Made some functions for said task. 11:59 | Been browsing the forums for user feedback and feature requests for 14 minutes. 12:00 | Eat lunch. 13:00 | Implement 2 hour task. 14:36 | Task complete, test it. 14:42 | A bug was found, it was related to a different scrum team. Submit bug report and fasttrack it to the relevant team. 14:51 | Another bug was found, since we made it we fix it. 15:00 | Scrum team leader wants to assign next task to developer. Developer is knee deep in code trying to fix afforementioned bug. 15:12 | Team leader checks in again, developer makes a dirty fix as to not introduce a lot of delays in the schedule.
....
The last part is the part that introduces bugs. Their time is chopped up in blocks like this because the team leader needs to organize the team so things get done on time. Occasionally devs stay after work hours to fix stuff they didn't have time to fix right away. At other times they fix things they messed up when there is time. Either way the make a note of it to review later. When there is enough time to do something extra. Like adding a setting to the game the might do so.
The problem is, everything they change in the game takes time. Some things can be changed right on the spot while other things requires more time than they have to spare. Then everything they change has to be tested, initially by themselves but also by people on SISI such as us players and the QA team.
If you want something special fixed the best option is to submit it to the CSM guys. Or apply for a job at CCP!
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 22:13:00 -
[45]
Further more, i am still waiting for the expansion whose sole purpose is to squash bugs and fix stuff in both the client and the server.
Lets name that expansion "Excellence" which is a fitting name to their announced drive last fanfest dubbed "Excellence".
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente The 8th Order
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 19:02:00 -
[46]
Has this been fixed?
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 20:11:00 -
[47]
Originally by: CCP Lemur Regarding the alignment: the UI folks told me that they think it is the other way around to be easy to read.
If find it always funny how others want to tell me how things are best for me.
But no sorry, I know it best MYSELF how I can read things the best way. Maybe for the majority it is easiest the other way. But that doesn't mean it is best for me also.
So, please give us a toggle that we can either align text to the right or to the left.
|
Vilgan i'Lakin
Pirates and Ninjas
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 22:36:00 -
[48]
Please either make a toggle or give us some sort of way to do this ourselves (maybe adjust .ini file?). Losing overview space because someone felt it looked better the other way sucks.
|
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 23:02:00 -
[49]
It still hides the units before it hides the numbers so I don't really see it as a problem. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente The 8th Order
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 19:06:00 -
[50]
Apparently not being able to click text in space is working as intended:
Description: You can no longer target or click on object TEXT in the game space to select its menu or target it. You can on TQ. Example: (O) Stargate (Jita) If I right click on the words "Stargate (Jita)" I would activate the dropdown menu. Now I must click on the small box area surrounding the object. That is less space to click something I may need to click. Why was this taken away?
// Hello, I believe this is working as designed. Though i don¦t know when, or why it was changed. You can access all of the same functions using the overview. [BH]Rawlamba //
THANKS SO MUCH FOR THIS GREAT NEW ADDITION REMOVAL OF A FEATURE THAT WORKED.
|
|
Linda Duane
Gallente Bluestar Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 19:21:00 -
[51]
Left aligned is superior in EVE Overview, especially when the column is sorted by range.. anything further out than 1.000m didn't need the units as the truncating/decimal visualization of eve where known by the podpilots.. we already got problems cramming and visializing all the info we need.
Right aligned makes sense when you got numbers with the same decimal units at the end all the column down.. so if you don't intend to put just Metres or Kilometres or AU in there, forget about 'can be better read'.. the Overview is a navigational instrument, not the market window or a excel spreadsheet for christ's sake.
/change not signed.
|
Nikita Alterana
Gallente Inimical Eclipse
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 20:21:00 -
[52]
Dear CCP, My Cat could design a better UI then you can. Hire me and I will prove this to you. In fact, temporarily bring in any member of the Eve Community and they will prove this to you. But Hire me anyway.
|
Kuar Z'thain
Amok. SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 20:47:00 -
[53]
I for one agree with the changes on clickable text. I cannot count the many times I have tried to click on a celestial only to click on some freaking text that was slightly covering it instead.
Right-aligned numbers, in a spreadsheet game? NO WAY!
|
theSONARnet
Gallente Dark-Rising IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 22:37:00 -
[54]
oh boy, the new text alignment sucks.
I don't know about you guys but I don't have a wide-screen monitor and therefore need to save screen space. Especially in fleets with all kinds of windows open + lots of extra columns in the overview. |
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente Net 7 The Last Brigade
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 07:14:00 -
[55]
Up.
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.05.26 23:08:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 26/05/2010 23:11:30
CCP FIX THIS I AM SO ****ED OFF RIGHT NOW
CCP you are alienating your playerbase:
[23:10:37] Julius Rigel > Nah, I don't care enough to complain [23:10:59] Julius Rigel > because every time I voice an opinion it gets ignored, so I've decided that my opinion is not welcome
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 11:16:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Cadde People saying it should be left to right because they wanna hide the distance text are right in their own way but seriously now... Has it come so far that your UI layout hangs on the fact you are losing some 30 pixels width wise? Are you one of those people that have your widescreens standing sideways so you only have 1080 pixels wide and 1920 pixels high? (or whatever widescreen resolution you have)
30 pixels wider UI is significant yes. Especially for multiboxers, where secondary clients only get small screens.
Out of curiosity, which columns have you added apart from the default to your overview?
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 13:17:00 -
[58]
Originally by: CCP Lemur Regarding the alignment: the UI folks told me that they think it is the other way around to be easy to read. Right aligned like the standard Excel formatting. No pun intended.
No idea about the rest for now.
This change makes life harder for a lot of us who keep a lot of overview columns open and thus need to minimize the width of a single column. Please revert it!
(Also sounds like confirmation that you should be in the market for new UI folks, should have been for a long time now) ----------------------------------------------- www.eve-arena.com
|
DDemon
Volatile Instability PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 16:53:00 -
[59]
I must say this change is the most useless and annoying change brought into the game. Even tho it probably took 10minutes max to change it, it brought forth allot of stress to the people that preferred it the original functional way.
I cannot comprehend why anyone would think: "Hey, the range box is aligned left, Lets change it to right even tho all other boxes are aligned left!" Either way, as a person earlier in the thread mentioned, My cat would design it better than you.
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 17:43:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Raimo on 27/05/2010 17:43:20
Originally by: Raimo
(Also sounds like confirmation that you should be in the market for new UI folks, should have been for a long time now)
Quoting myself for emphasis. Also, devs really should play this game, *ESPECIALLY* the ones in charge of the "User Interface"... ----------------------------------------------- www.eve-arena.com
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |