Somewhere along the way, I began taking success for granted. As hubris set in, I became less inclined to listen to pleas for caution. Red flags raised by very smart people both at CCP and in the community went unheeded because of my stubborn refusal to allow adversity to gain purchase on our plans

If you wait a few days your bot programmer will fix the bot for you. Meanwhile, use any of the other whine threads or just stop flooding the forum with your tears.

If you wait a few days your bot programmer will fix the bot for you.

Hellmar is busy but sent me here to report his reply: *BUuUURP*

Now stop calling people out on forums and go play

Oh look, it's this idiotic argument. It's really spreading like wildfire among those not gifted with sentient thought.

You realise, of course, that the complaints are largely about things that botters are not concerned with and that, if anything, bots will probably be easier to make with the new UI? Oh wait. Sentient thought. Sorry, forgot.

Although someone needs to be slapped upside the head for ignoring the Sisi feedback.

It was not an argument, it's a fact.

Spamming the forums with whine is not exactly sentient behaviour either.

third the point of this thread isn't to complain about the UI as CCPs direction here, even if you love the UI surely you can see that they're going back on some pretty important promises for every player here?

You can't compare Incarna with the Unified Inventory, as god-awful as it is.

The unified inventory was not a business strategy, signed off at high levels that drains money from players. Instead it was simply an attempt at making something better for the players that got seriously screwed up somewhere in coding. Which is forgiveable.

Although someone needs to be slapped upside the head for ignoring the Sisi feedback.

Have you tried emailing him directly?

design by committee doesn't work, design by democracy is even worse.

removing the new inventory UI will lead to just as many rage threads from those of us who love it

giving the option to have both only results in maintenance issues further down the road (due to having to maintain two codebases) and will set a precedent that will force CCP to make every UI change optional.

people said the same things they say now about the new inventory UI about the new neocom when it was released - and CCP made the experience that after a few patches most people went on happily with their lives.

if the concept art we saw at FF is any indication of where things are heading we will see a lot more UI changes (with accompanying protests) in the future.

Do you want to freeze the pre-Incarna client UI and maintain it as a separate mode for the next five years?

Or do you want to allow people to choose any combination of UI elements they desire? old necom, new contracts interface, old mail interface, new inventory, no debuff indicator?
At that point you will not only have a buggy dependance nighmare, you'll also have the paradox of choice set in.

people said the same things they say now about the new inventory UI about the new neocom when it was released - and CCP made the experience that after a few patches most people went on happily with their lives.

if the concept art we saw at FF is any indication of where things are heading we will see a lot more UI changes (with accompanying protests) in the future.

Do you want to freeze the pre-Incarna client UI and maintain it as a separate mode for the next five years?

also emailing the CEO over a UI change is extremely ridiculous - he does business strategy, not client development.

if you want to complain to anyone who is high on the corporate ladder, then complain to Unifex as that is his domain/responsibility.

once again i'm not saying that the new UI should be removed completely, i'm saying it should be made optional so that everybody is happy. surely everybody can see that

i'd love to, except the UI is terrible for me and has turned what was a fun game for me into something i'd prefer to avoid,

So you're saying that the EVE developers should develop a game that makes everyone happy? Options can be setup so everyone can play the way they want? That works for little things like Walking in Station vs Ship Spinning, and possibly even New vs Old Inventory UI, but where do you draw the line? Do you let carebears turn on an option so they can't be suicide ganked? Do implement a system to can flipping or ninja looting? Do you put rules in place to prevent contract scamming? Add swords and magic for those who'd rather play in a fantasy world?

The best CCP can do is implement their vision of a space simulator, and let players in. Players then decide whether or not they want to play in the world CCP has created.

So you're saying that the EVE developers should develop a game that makes everyone happy? Options can be setup so everyone can play the way they want? That works for little things like Walking in Station vs Ship Spinning, and possibly even New vs Old Inventory UI, but where do you draw the line? Do you let carebears turn on an option so they can't be suicide ganked? Do implement a system to can flipping or ninja looting? Do you put rules in place to prevent contract scamming? Add swords and magic for those who'd rather play in a fantasy world?

I think you see where I'm going with this. It's just not possible to make everybody happy. The best CCP can do is implement their vision of a space simulator, and let players in. Players then decide whether or not they want to play in the world CCP has created.




Are you actually claiming that the change in the Inventory UI has made EVE unplayable for you? Seriously?

Adapt or biomass...

No, it's not. It's just blatant idiocy.

So stop doing it. You only reinforce the point.

if i knew his email i would love to.

Incarna showed that there is absolutely value in telling CCP that their assumptions are flawed and that they need to go back to the drawing-board to give us back parts of the UI that they wanted to remove. There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't maintain the old functionality in the new system, and there are plenty of reasons why dumping functionality is a bad thing that will cost you more than trying to keep it.

Second group are players who really resist change, have difficulties in adapting, and just aren't very good with computers. When you combine this with serious entitlement delusions, inability to express opinions in a mature manner and internet anonymity, a rage of shitpoasting ensues. Their concerns, however, are legit, CCP could have at least released some videos on how to use the new UI, implemented tool-tip help or whatever is normally done to help people adapt, standard change management.

Third group, a minority among the whiners, are people who reveal bugs and inconsistencies in the UI and report them back to CCP. Why these were not handled properly before release is beyond us all, probably has a lot to do with Jon Lander and Inferno being his first expansion, ie. hammering things through for personal/career/ego/position reasons. Some of these, you included/especially, are opinion leaders. Many people follow them, and form their opinions based on the example shown by respected community members.

You like arguing, don't you? "Bot programmers will fix the bots in a few days" is a fact.

Botters have a clear motivation to cause a shitstorm over this UI change. Unlike for us, the players, EVE really is broken for them.

For them, or us, this forum rage is ridiculous, inflammatory to our gaming experience and when it reaches a point where reasoning with whiners becomes impossible, resort to trolling.

Take care.

They did not "ignore" the feedback (I am aware that they actually ignored a Sisi feedback a bit-ácompletely).

So which promise was broken?

Btw. did anyone of you actually read the last devblog?

They did not "ignore" the feedback (I am aware that they actually ignored a Sisi feedback a bit). They know there are some usability issues and are trying to fix them. So which promise was broken?

i'm complaining about the process, what CCP have done here is almost identical to incarna as far as the process goes and yet you who appear to be intelligent enough to understand this refuses to acknowledge this fact? and not only that you tell people who are calling CCP out about this to basically HTFU?

Adapt or biomass...

can i has your stuffs?

Btw. did anyone of you actually read the last devblog?

They did not "ignore" the feedback

He can't figure out how to access it

It's the whole "calling out" part that I don't agree with. It's CCP's software, they have their reasons which don't really interest me that much, I'm just a customer and not a shareholder.

If I go to a restaurant and get ****** food, I don't start screaming in front of other customers about it. I might choose another restaurant next time, probably not if I like the place.

If there's a long queue in the market, I don't feel I have the right to start yelling at the stressed clerk about it. I might choose another market next time, or come at another time.

No, it's not. It's just blatant idiocy.
So stop doing it. You only reinforce the point.

GÇ£UnlikeGÇ¥? It's quite broken for us as well, you know GÇö the GÇ£unlike for usGÇ¥ part is that they will have their issues fixed in short order, unlike us who have to live with this awful mess. It doesn't particularly matter what other groups agree or why GÇö the simple fact remains that a fuckton of functionality was lost in the implementation of the new UI (and that's before counting the bugs and the performance issues).

GǪhence Gǣblatant idiocyGǥ. Here's why it's impossible to reason with them: because they're right and they know it. Reasoning with them is impossible because you're trying to convince them that the sky is pink-on-green polka-dot. You're arguing against reality. That doesn't make the people who are trying to GǣreasonGǥ with them trolls so much as late-term BSE victims.

Stick your head in a mulcher.

I just got of the phone with Hilmar and he said: "stop crying you man babies. we are looking into it".

Your subjective opinions aren't facts, no matter how many times you repeat them.

Your subjective opinions aren't facts, no matter how many times you repeat them.

No, they feel that they are right

In-game, I suppose?

Botters have a clear motivation to cause a shitstorm over this UI change. Unlike for us, the players, EVE really is broken for them. Their revenue-creating programs don't work, until their bots are fixed. These people undoubtedly masquerade here as butthurt players and aim to fuel the fire. They are not interested in CCP or playerbase, other than as a means of low-effort extra income.

Second group are players who really resist change, have difficulties in adapting, and just aren't very good with computers. When you combine this with serious entitlement delusions, inability to express opinions in a mature manner and internet anonymity, a rage of shitpoasting ensues. Their concerns, however, are legit, CCP could have at least released some videos on how to use the new UI, implemented tool-tip help or whatever is normally done to help people adapt, standard change management.

Third group, a minority among the whiners, are people who reveal bugs and inconsistencies in the UI and report them back to CCP. Why these were not handled properly before release is beyond us all, probably has a lot to do with Jon Lander and Inferno being his first expansion, ie. hammering things through for personal/career/ego/position reasons. Some of these, you included/especially, are opinion leaders. Many people follow them, and form their opinions based on the example shown by respected community members.

Fourth, and by far the largest group, are players who are indifferent to inventory interface changes or adapted to it at first sight. For them, or us, this forum rage is ridiculous, inflammatory to our gaming experience and when it reaches a point where reasoning with whiners becomes impossible, resort to trolling.

Your subjective opinions aren't facts, no matter how many times you repeat them.

My subjective opinion is that no functionality was lost, but much new functionality was added. What I used to do is easier now, and there's stuff I couldn't do with the old inventory. Is this a fact? Might feel like it, but "I like" does not result in anything objective.

that this release has been handled very poorly

that there are many unsatisfied people with the unified inventory

Another whiner who hasn't figured out "shift+click".

Another whiner who hasn't figured out "shift+click".

holy crap Fabulousli Obvious i had to read my own quote three times before i realised how badly written it was.. thank you

There you go. Much better.

The promise of an improved inventory management system. It will remain broken until the lost functionality is fully restored.

Also, the promise to listen to their customers. If they did, the UI wouldn't have been released before it was finished.

regardless of the UI and yours or mine feelings towards it, would you agree to the following three points?

that this release has been handled very poorly

that there are many people unsatisfied with the unified inventory

that putting an option in to enable people to use either UI would be a suitable compromise to solve the majority of the problems

remember being objective here (as i've attempted to be all through this thread)

so they didn't ignore the feedback.. except for the WEEKs of feedback from SiSi?

they either did or didn't. and the fact that they ignored that SiSi feedback, pushed a buggy feature live and only started listening to peoples complaints after this shitstorm started is not communicating with your playerbase in any meaningful way, combined with the fact that they're ignoring those people who are making reasoned arguments for making this optional instead and are trying to force people to play is definitely not good communication

Btw. did anyone of you actually read the last devblog?
They did not "ignore" the feedback (I am aware that they actually ignored a Sisi feedback a bit). They know there are some usability issues and are trying to fix them.
So which promise was broken?

Yeah, that's gameplay you're talking about, not interface design. Two sliiiiightly different things.

Yes, providing people with the options to customise their UI to their preference is the right thing to do.
No, providing people with the options to customise their rule-set doesn't make sense.
They're not the same thing.

This isn't about the world, though, and the best CCP can do is listen to how the players want to interface with that world. Dropping functionality for no good reason does not qualify.

Since you're prone to hyperbole, try this one on for size: in Inferno 1.5, they are removing all graphics for a purely sound-based game. Is that still CCP doing the best they can do?

Go to the sisi feedback thread and have a look. There is a difference between ignoring and not acting upon the feedback. They even said what they think. That is not ignoring in my book.

Oh and when will you people learn that making core mechanics optional is not reasonable argument?

well as it's been two hours it seems that Hillmar and indeed any member of staff at CCP is either unable or unwilling to comment on the general clusterfuck that this patch has brought the foreground - for some at least - in public, perhaps privately? my email address is attached to this account, feel free to email me and we can discuss this privately, and hey if i leak it you can drop the banhammer on me can't you?

i seriously doubt this problem is going to go away just because you ignore it, i would hope that was made apparent with incarna

well as it's been two hours it seems that Hillmar and indeed any member of staff at CCP is either unable or unwilling to comment on the general clusterfuck that this patch has brought the foreground - for some at least - in public, perhaps privately? my email address is attached to this account, feel free to email me and we can discuss this privately, and hey if i leak it you can drop the banhammer on me can't you?

i seriously doubt this problem is going to go away just because you ignore it, i would hope that was made apparent with incarna

i seriously doubt this problem is going to go away just because you ignore it, i would hope that was made apparent with incarna

Do you also call Steve Balmer on forums to answer you personally every time Microsoft implement something you don-¦t like?

Please stop behaving like spoiled child.

lol, you actually are waiting?

unfortunately a UI is not a mechanic. it's a feature. just like graphics, just like sound, and the mechanics BEHIND the UI wouldn't be changed any more than painting the wall would turn it from brick into cardboard. look at other MMOs where you can edit your UI, (unfortunately) WoW is a great example of this, you can customise anything you want and it DOES NOT CHANGE how the game functions. just looks

changing your windows scheme doesn't change the way that windows operates does it?
changing the look of the icons on your desktop doesn't make them work differently
changing the background and icons on your phone doesn't make it work differently either

see where i'm going with this?

and you have yet to make a reasonable argument as to why it is not feasable.

You can't compare Incarna with the Unified Inventory, as god-awful as it is.

The unified inventory was not a business strategy, signed off at high levels that drains money from players. Instead it was simply an attempt at making something better for the players that got seriously screwed up somewhere in coding. Which is forgiveable.

Although someone needs to be slapped upside the head for ignoring the Sisi feedback.

Fine, so let's leave the game rules out. Asking CCP to provide options to customize UI is a terrible idea because you end up with a mess of a client application. If they provide an open API for player-UI mods, fine. But options are a really bad idea. Just look at any enterprise software application.

For one, I can't tell if CCP is doing their best or not.

The reason I'm posting about it because of how surprised I am at the reaction some players are having to it.

It just occurred to me that this is a alt post thread. Well I mean an alt of another well known poster who is also posting in this thread. Good form my man, good form.

*edit* also Shpenat i've noticed your all for dismissing me as a spoiled child, essentially saying everybody who doesn't like the new system should HTFU, asking if people have read the test thread and i have to ask

have you?
first page first POST go compare it to the "dev blog" that soundwave published and the 'bugs' that have been fixed already

you also haven't posted a single reason as to why an option between using either inventory isn't viable, or made any specific points as to how this one is better that isn't your opinion and is backed up by evidence.

also if you go back through my posts you'll see that i haven't insulted your stance or i'm being nothing but respectful to both you and anybody else who posts, except my first response to bootleg but trolls irritate me when they don't put any effort in

to avoid confusion here's the two most prominent ones



which has been confirmed as a bug



and patch notes say?

Patch notes for EVE Online: Inferno 1.0.2
Locked BPOs will now display correctly, i.e. be dimmed out compared to unlocked BPOs.

so looks like that's a bug as well

no they didn't at all ignore feedback from 3 weeks ago and push it out live still broken did they?

are you trying to say that i'm an alt? beyond me telling you i'm not there's little i could do to disprove it? besides isn't talking to yourself a sign you've lost the plot?

Ah I am not dismissing you. Apology if that sounded that way. I am just starting to hate people who argue along the line: I am paying customer I have the rights to influence the software development. Your only right is to unsubscribe and not use that piece of software anymore. Sure every sense company will want to have feedback from customers, but that does not give you right to demand it.

I am not trying to white-knight the new inventory systems. It is buggy and it removed some usability. What I am trying to point out is that they did not ignore the feedback. They did not acted upon it in the right manner. But that is not same thing as ignoring it.

Ah I am not dismissing you. Apology if that sounded that way. I am just starting to hate people who argue along the line: I am paying customer I have the rights to influence the software development. Your only right is to unsubscribe and not use that piece of software anymore. Sure every sense company will want to have feedback from customers, but that does not give you right to demand it.

I am not trying to white-knight the new inventory systems. It is buggy and it removed some usability. What I am trying to point out is that they did not ignore the feedback. They did not acted upon it in the right manner. But that is not same thing as ignoring it.

nah it's just another part of the meta game. Even I run with multiple forum alts. I'm going to wait and see if anyone else see's what I see.

unfortunately your mistaken ;) no meta game here, i've got 6 toons, 3 accounts, this was my first and is my main

i am curious who's alt you think i am though?

Don't drag him into this. We'll be here forever.

Options is everything; modding is where the bad things start to happen. All but the most useless piece of hacked-together software offers UI options and customisations. They are always a good thing. An open UI API on the other hand leads to a messy application and opens up for all kinds of abuses. There's a reason why all software offers UI options; there's also a reason why few of them offers UI modding.

Asking CCP to provide options is not a terrible idea GÇö it's ******* mandatory!

Lets see if I understand correctly what you are trying to tell here: Options are things that are supported by developer. Modding is modification done by some 3rd party or user himself. If that definition is correct, then your last sentence should read "There's a reason why all software offers sensible amount of UI options; .... "

Oh and btw. the software that has no UI options are often the most powerful ones. I thought you knew.

very well technically you're right, but don't you find it interesting that things they are listing as bugs now they said were intended or flat out dismissed during the TESTING phase? surely that falls under poor communication and lack of player involvement - two things which CCPs CEO specifically promised to improve and in this case has failed, do you agree?

and i'm not trying to say CCP cannot use a new inventory system, far from it i've said to keep it in by all means, like i've said there may well be many people who love the new system - it is a shame very few are posting - and i've already exercised my right to stop giving CCP money, i'm also exercising my right as a customer to complain about poor service, CCP have not yet addressed it and as i'm still a customer till my subscription ends.

and truly i love this game, i have for over 5 years, i'm not trying to destroy it, or discredit CCP, i'm fighting to save it, granted i'm trying to save it for myself - so i'm not claiming to be altruistic at all

This is what I can agree on. Poor communication for sure. Fail on CCP side as well. Just that the way of asking CEO of company to reply personally to one of its customers within 2 hours is really unreasonable.

Oh and btw. the software that has no UI options are often the most powerful ones. I thought you knew.

GǪat that point, we're not longer talking about programs, but about languages.

Somehow I doubt that most EVE players would want to code an EVE client of their own just to play the game.

Oh, and btw. I haven't come across a single piece of software that has no UI options.

I like the new inventory.

would you mind explaining what the improvements are in your eyes?

also Verone your right, another problem with using an explorer layout in EVE in my eyes is that you can't open two seperate instances of it to move from explorer A to explorer B

EVERYTHING you can do in the old system you can do in the new system.

The new inventory is great. Sure there are a few problems with it (mostly in POS mangement), but CCP has already addressed said problems and said a fix is in the works. If you have problems with the new UI beyond that, noone cares. If you are too dumb to figure out how windows explorer in Eve works well you're too dumb too have an opinion that anyone cares about. EVERYTHING you can do in the old system you can do in the new system. Dragging things 1/2" to your tree is much quicker than dragging them from one corner of the screen to another. The filters are great. How organized large hangers can get now with cargo containers is beyond awesome.

I would be curious to see what all these crybabies do in game. I wonder if they are mostly hypocritical nul-ies who tell carebares to adapt but then totally fail to do the same. Or if this is just all more carebare crying.

New inventory is bad, and CCP should feel bad about it.
There is no more possible discussion.
Roll It back.

If you wait a few days your bot programmer will fix the bot for you. Meanwhile, use any of the other whine threads or just stop flooding the forum with your tears.

I would certainly hope that this new ui is capable of also doing what the old one used to?

You sir, are whats wrong with the EVE-O forums. OP has taken time to make a coherent, well written post, and all you have to say is "gtfo botter"? These forums used to have discussions, back and forths, stories, etc, but theyre degenerating into dime-a-dozen trash posts like the above. If you don't have anything to say, dont say anything at all.

As far as the UI goes, it needs tweaks, its unfortunate that these tweaks, which were glaringly obvious from its first day on the SiSi server weren't made prior to realease, but overall I think having a toggable "New UI On/Off" button would be a bad move for CCP. Fix what needs fixing, and call it a day. CCP is on the right track with changes like these, they just need to remember that, like OP said, they have a commitment to listen to player feedback (excepting lame trollers like the quote above), and seriously take this player feedback into consideration before rolling out major new features.

I would certainly hope that this new ui is capable of also doing what the old one used to?

The thing is actually depressing me.

Tell me its not more primative than the old one
The old one could have had a tree

It's the whole "calling out" part that I don't agree with. It's CCP's software, they have their reasons which don't really interest me that much, I'm just a customer and not a shareholder.

If I go to a restaurant and get ****** food, I don't start screaming in front of other customers about it. I might choose another restaurant next time, probably not if I like the place.

If there's a long queue in the market, I don't feel I have the right to start yelling at the stressed clerk about it. I might choose another market next time, or come at another time.

If CCP introduces some stuff that I think is broken, I write it in the appropriate thread, and work around it until they fix it.

Actually, it's the other way around. Everything you could do in the new system could be done in the old one. The opposite isn't true for the simple reason that the new system doesn't fully support multiple windows and persistent inventory locations like the old one did.

Here is the gist of what the internal line is. "we'll watch what they do, not listen to what they say".

Ban Hammers are raining down folks.

My other alt got banned for posting Monty Python Spam about the Spam Sketch in the FAKE SPAM THREAD.

Pathetic CCP. Such priorities in choosing who to ban and for why.


Now they start in on those who multi-posted about these UI Issues I guess.

First they ignore you...then THEY start 3 different GM threads about the issue to Divide and Conquer. Then they ban you.

The way the wind blows now is Obvious.

it's odd they banned you for that, if that's all you did you should appeal it, but i'd like the thread to stay on topic

Post while you still can. Good Luck.

What?
No really, what?!

Options is everything; modding is where the bad things start to happen. All but the most useless piece of hacked-together software offers UI options and customisations. They are always a good thing. An open UI API on the other hand leads to a messy application and opens up for all kinds of abuses. There's a reason why all software offers UI options; there's also a reason why few of them offers UI modding.

Can you tell whether something is better or worse than before?
If, after Tuesday's patch, you were no longer able to use your mouse in-game, would you be able to tell?

What's surprising about it? Functionality was removed for no good reason and after the devs had been told clearly, and repeatedly that the thing was going to cause issues if released in the current state.

It's not just annoyance with the loss of functionality.
It's not just annoyance with the waste of feedback.

It's the continuing saga of CCP being absolutely incapable of any communication other than damage control and the disappointment that they fell back into that mode so easily after having such a good run with the last expansion and seemingly being on the road to recoveryGǪ

GǪand the annoyance with the loss of functionality and meaningless feedback.

I am satisfied, after reading the dev blog, that CCP are doing what they can to return functionality in some form to us.

He can't figure out how to access it

Second, where's the waste of feedback?


Third, CCP is one of the more communicative gaming companies I know of. CCP does dev blogs, dev panels at fanfest, dev organized meet ups, participation in forums, etc, etc. That doesn't seem like an inability to communicate to me.

Built-in UI options leads to UI complexity, because users are forced to deal with all available options. With modding, they just pick and choose what they want. And built-in options isn't really optional, is it?

Now you're the one who's prone to hyperbole, and you're changing the question. You didn't ask if something was better or worse, you asked if I though CCP was doing their best. I don't know.

A few points here. First, what functionality was removed?

Second, where's the waste of feedback?

Yes, it also increases complexity for the developers, but that's just a small matter of programming GÇö it's their job.

Fair enough. A better way of putting it is: if this is their best, we're screwed.

In essence, all forms of multi-window functionality. If you want the nitty-gritty details (and why shift-click doesn't solve anything), I can only ask you to read through the four five threads CCP has started on the topic (and two officially supported feedback threads). They're shock-full of information. The link in my sig also leads to some of the first issues spotted GÇö the list has grown since then. The reason the OP doesn't lay it out is because this has already been done over and over again and CCP knows where to find it.

On sisi. Pretty much every last thing that people are now screaming about was reported during the testing on singularity, together with stern warnings that things would not go well if this went liveGǪ and then it went live with zero modification. Thus came all the rage threads and then the responses to those and only then any hint of them wanting to gather feedback. This is an age-old issue that has bred a culture of bugfixing-through-shouting that is now pervasive throughout the EVE community.

1. CCP presents something. It (generally) looks awesome, and people say so.
2. People test it and find the huge gaps in the awesomeness, and say so.
3. CCP repeats the GÇ£it's awesomeGÇ¥ they heard in step 1, and people say GÇ£huh? did you hear what we said in step 2?GÇ¥
4. People compile lists of issues and suggestions for solutions.
5. CCP says it's awesome because people said so in step 1, and release it.
6. People go MOFSCKINGIDIOTS!!
7. CCP says GÇ£oops, we'll fix thatGÇ¥.

GǪand the next time, people are a bit more reticent to do those first two testing parts (steps 2 and 4), which makes the last steps (6GÇô7) that more common and annoying. It's a vicious circle and everyone loses.

Also, there's no possible way CCP can acknowledge and act on every bit of feedback they get.

Also, there's no possible way CCP can acknowledge and act on every bit of feedback they get. I think people threatening to unsubscribe three days after an expansion has released because one minor feature out of many doesn't line up perfectly to the way they play is going overboard.

Waaaaaaaaaaa whhaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnerrrrrr

It is. But by using a modding system, it could be the community's job. Yes, modding can lead to a mess, but there are plenty of examples of games that have done modding correctly, which have spawned things that are much, much better than developers had envisioned.

It may have taken CCP a bit of time to clue in, but they did, in step 7. I don't see that as wasted feedback. Delayed acceptance of feedback, sure, but not wasted.

The thing is, I don't trust either CCP or the community to make that work in a remotely sane way, and the default UI needs a whole bunch of options anyway.

It's wasted since it could have been done in step 3, rather than [ willfully | ignorantly ] creating steps 6 and 7. The entire issue brought up by this thread is that they kind of promised that this exact thing wouldn't happen againGǪ

GǪhence why people are so willing to bring out the big guns from the last time it happened.

You'd be surprised about what the community can do when it comes to UI and mods. WoW has a Lua-based GUI API and there's THOUSANDS of mods (apparently, I've never played). However, you can also make an API that uses a markup language instead, like mozlib or QT.

You'd be surprised about what the community can do when it comes to UI and mods. WoW has a Lua-based GUI API and there's THOUSANDS of mods (apparently, I've never played). However, you can also make an API that uses a markup language instead, like mozlib or QT.

also for anybody who hasn't the post linked in Jebediah MacAhab Dallocorts sig is well worth a read

i haven't played WoW in nearly three years now but some of the mods for UI over there are - for lack of a better word - amazing, and the advantage of a system like that is you can then proceed to steal all the best features and add them to your own default UI - which is exactly what they've done because all the bugs have been worked out of it by the people doing the modding for nothing other than love of the game it's already been tested and if a mod gets that popular it shows them that there's something missing that they should have

To the OP....suck it up buttercup

I think it's fine once you get used to it.
It's a quite fundamental part of the game they changed and I felt really clumsy the first few times, but then you get used to it.

I agree completely with you on the T2 manufacturing - there is simply no fun in it now. Since every T2 manufacturer is going through this pain production is inevitably going to fall. The obvious solution from our side as manufacturers is to take account of the coming T2 price rises and start speculating on the T2 market now, instead of wasting our time navigating menus. This will push up T2 prices even more of course, but the Shift-Clickers are obviously willing to pay higher prices.

If the prices of T2 ships were set not by the cost of their underlying components but by the number of clicks now required to build them, prices will be going through the rood. Up by an order of magnitude. And "shift-click will fix it" won't fix it. Shift-click is the final step in a process that also involves navigating through several levels of menus, window resizing, and high-precision scrollbarring, before you can even locate the place you need to shift-click on. All to do what you used to be able to do with one click. We're then dismissed as whiners by people who have to do this once or twice in a station, not realizing that the things they are shift-clicking on already required hundreds of clicks to manufacture and trade before the expansion.

The only thing I disagree with you on is making the new UI optional. It's the right idea, but they had to do that last year with CQ. From a corporate point of view CCP shareholders are going to be less than impressed with two years in a row where the new product forced the company to spend extra money on retro-fitting an optional roll-back. So while it's the right idea, its probably not going to happen this year (and will probably lead to sackings if it does).

Kasriel,

I know change is not something many players like. Hell I did a course on "human resistance to change" in my Human Resource Management major. But CCP did a very good job in trying to accommodate all players that want the old system back. They still can in fact. Sort of. Simply SHIFT+left click on a tree section (for instance your ship hanger, or items hanger) and it will create a new tab with just the items in that particular tree section. .

5 days later and still no fix. Nice to see them listening.

For those of us that have to do a LOT of inventory management in a typical play session, this new interface is a NIGHTMARE.

Currently we are seeing _very predictable feedback_ on what we are doing. Having the perspective of having done this for a decade, I can tell you that this is one of the moments where we look at what our players do and less of what they say. Innovation takes time to set in and the predictable reaction is always to resist change.

well as it's been two hours it seems that Hillmar and indeed any member of staff at CCP is either unable or unwilling to comment on the general clusterfuck that this patch has brought the foreground - for some at least - in public, perhaps privately? my email address is attached to this account, feel free to email me and we can discuss this privately, and hey if i leak it you can drop the banhammer on me can't you?

I'll wait to see how CCP jumps before I make any irrevocable decisions.

I am no programmer or developer myself, but please be aware that what you are asking for is likley going to be a huge undertaking as far as coding is concerned.

but it also needs to do the same thing twice. Should your proposal be implemented, that is.

What do you think will happen with the chance of errors between both versions? Do you also realize what the result will be should another additional add-on be added on top of this? It's almost as if a new game is being developed because it simply needs to take into account that information on how the inventory is stored is handled in a different manner in each preference.

I know change is not something many players like. Hell I did a course on "human resistance to change" in my Human Resource Management major. But CCP did a very good job in trying to accommodate all players that want the old system back. They still can in fact. Sort of. Simply SHIFT+left click on a tree section (for instance your ship hanger, or items hanger) and it will create a new tab with just the items in that particular tree section.

Now, of course CCP needs to make sure that the inventory screens that players create do not bug out (size changes back to default, or it needs to be manually opened again each time etc.) This is being worked on as we speak. But that's the best thing CCP can do. Adding the option like you suggest is not a good solution. It would make the game sluggish and more susceptive to errors.

you are still a vocal minority of the CCP player base as a whole.