No, he's right. The old system was a pain. It needed fixing.

dont polish a turd, give us back the old one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then WHY in the name of all that is good did you ignore ALL of the bad feedback telling you it was not ready from nearly every user on SiSi and go ahead and put it on TQ???

Just tell us this. Please.

And..



Why wasn't this your 'first priority' before while it was on SiSi?

The old system wasn't pain, but this new treepanel it is. We need a single panel treeview filemanager for Eve ? Really ???

And what about the pos guns and other pos modules when i dont have access fro POS, but loading to my Cargo hold ? LOL

The point you're missing is that the new system ~could~ have been awesome, helpful and good.

It could have been if they had spent a couple more months revamping and testing arguably the most fundamental system in the game.

First, on the SISI thing; it's true that we let a few issues slip us and that's regrettable, but it is simply a fact that not all issues surface on test servers. We certainly did fix a LOT of issues that we discovered through your feedback from SISI. But, not all of them sadly.

Revamping a fundamental system, used by every single player, such as the inventory system so that it will fit every player's needs and expectations from day one is a tall order to say the least.

THE biggest complaint about the EVE UI, according to our surveys, is the number of windows needed to accomplish tasks.

I think it's safe to say that a game shipping with the old EVE inventory system EVE today would receive mixed reviews

One of the hardest part of EVE is dealing with the UI and we are constantly being asked to change it.

The point you're missing is that the new system ~could~ have been awesome, helpful and good.

It wasn't on release and now we're all caught up in it's development instead of it being done on a test server, with community feedback and proper development cycles and... testing.


EDIT: Imagine a system where, you search for something in a single search bar (similar to how windows works) and it opens up in a single window with it's location in an address bar or something. Something to where you have an intuitive in nature and fluid asset management and inventory system that is complete and functional. A system where folders and containers are no longer necessary. Or, when you have folders (containers) they too function with the inventory and asset manager.

With more testing and development, this could have gone live! It would have been great! Instead, we now need to hear people, rightfully, frustrated about what they're now forced to use.


EDIT2: The issue is that the development cycle was poorly managed. The old inventory system is (was) horrible. It needed work. The thing is, you got so used to it that you were able to put up with it's bulky interface.

Step 1 should have been to modify and fix the asset management window. Integrate it within corp assets (so I don't need to go to two different places) and provide something in the asset management for filters and searches.

THEN go for the new inventory system.

they did it backwards.

Yes, thanks for quoting what I said and adding absolutely nothing of value to the discussion.

Before inferno, I would dock and my ship hangar, items, and corp hangar would all be open right where I left them. I could see everything I owned and interact with it instantly.

That was really nice. I think it's something we should have again.

The new inventory system needs to be more unified with the Neocom - it'd be nice to be able to create shortcuts on the neocom bar that are context sensitive for things like individual POS hangers/fuel bays, or a current station's hanger, or a specific station hangar, or a SMA, that only show up if the inventory node in question is available.

You could then use it to replicate the functionality of the old ship/hangar buttons that used to be above the undock button. Throw in the ability to fake up a close replica of the old system with some extra checkbox options (say, "open new inventory panes in seperate windows"), and suddenly people who fear change can revert to their beloved million-windows interface.

Yep.

An in general this new system should have been built in correct order:

1. Add all the basic functionality what old system had.
2. Make all windows behave (stack, save, persist) like they did in old system.
3. Add more features which support old functionality.
4. Add totally new functionality which maybe helps and works for someone.

...but no - victory goes to the one who yelled "scrap 1-3" - we are CCP and skip boldly directly to line four, call it improvement and pretty efficiently ruin everyone's game play in the process.

I've not been able to be very active on the forums for the last couple of days simple because my time is better spent fixing defects as it is.

First, on the SISI thing; it's true that we let a few issues slip us and that's regrettable, but it is simply a fact that not all issues surface on test servers. We certainly did fix a LOT of issues that we discovered through your feedback from SISI. But, not all of them sadly.

Revamping a fundamental system, used by every single player, such as the inventory system so that it will fit every player's needs and expectations from day one is a tall order to say the least. There is probably no other system within EVE that is as multidimensional as the inventory and the use cases seem to be endless. The old system had not changed much at all and most of you veterans could probably operate it at lightning speeds blindfolded. Having to waste time re-learning basic things is annoying as hell and I get it. I've been there myself. I would be pretty furious if someone forced me to use a different Python editor, and it would probably slow me down tremendously for the first couple of days or even weeks. A fitting punishment for my crimes maybe?

THE biggest complaint about the EVE UI, according to our surveys, is the number of windows needed to accomplish tasks. We identified the inventory as being one of the biggest violator and that's why we went on this journey (not because we like to spend Sunday afternoons on the EVE forums, lovely as they are, mind you!). A lot of things have changed in the world of user interfaces during the last 10 years, and I think it's safe to say that a game shipping with the old EVE inventory system EVE today would receive mixed reviews.

The old system had been brewing out in the wild for 9 years, but the new one for less than a week, so obviously it has not received the same amount of updates and fixes. We are, and will be working hard to make sure that no matter your profession in EVE, you will have an equally or faster way of doing what you need to do.

I beg you to honestly give the new system a try. If you still don't like it and you aren't able to find an equally good or better work flow for your tasks, tell us why. Many of you have already done so, and we will are already acting on that feedback, but keep it coming. Telling us that it sucks won't help anyone, and I must stretch what has already been stated that reverting the entire thing is not an option (It's also as good as technically impossible). Making it optional is also not optional (confusingly enough) as it would require us to maintain two systems side by side which would cause an exponential increase in code and interface complexity if we were to make a habit of it. It's not as simple or as good of an idea as it might seem at first.

One of the hardest part of EVE is dealing with the UI and we are constantly being asked to change it. When we do, people without exceptions ask for the old one back. Doing both is obviously impossible. There is still work to be done and work we shall.

You could then use it to replicate the functionality of the old ship/hangar buttons that used to be above the undock button. Throw in the ability to fake up a close replica of the old system with some extra checkbox options (say, "open new inventory panes in seperate windows"), and suddenly people who fear change can revert to their beloved million-windows interface.

Fear change. I never really understood that accusation. Change can be totally awesome. When it's for the better. Not liking a specific change isn't necessarily because someone fears change. Most folks bitching about this UI change legitimately dislike it. Remember, just because I don't want to get punched in the mouth every morning as my new morning routine doesn't mean I fear change, it just means I don't want to have to be punched in the mouth every morning.

It would be totally awesome... if it wasn't for the bugs and teething problems, and the way it suddenly forces people to unlearn thing they've been doing for years in order to cope with all the inconveniences of the old system (a million windows) in order to learn to cope with the inconveniences of the new system (shift click everything). If CCP had started out with the new inventory system and switched to the old one, we'd have a far, far bigger outcry. "MY INVENTORY FILTERS GIVE THEM BACK" etc.

I mean, look what happened when they took out contact folders in Tyrannis. They ended up putting them back in.

Really, from my personal experience with the thing, my biggest complaints are pretty much addressed by what's supposed to be in the Tuesday patch (Performance of the inventory near a POS). I'd say the whole debacle could have been avoided if they'd delayed Crucible by a week - but then people would complain about CCP pushing the release date back.

CCP just can't win with the playerbase as a collective.

Hi Devs.
[...]

My question to you CCP, why you change best working mechanism in game ?

Ps.While we old players can deal with your new full of wired mechanic inventory im 100% sure newbis need spent more time to discovery how it works... Why you bring chaos to game ?

Fix the bugs, restore the lost functionality,...

...but never believe that the playerbase is unanimous in wanting a return to the good old days.

Since I've been playing for less than a month, perhaps I'm less invested in some of the more complex game systems or haven't been exposed to some of the use cases that people feel have been messed up. Maybe.