I'm currently fine with the new Uni.Inv. and I live in a POS in a wormhole. Does that make me a bad person or something?

Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.

um.. I would suggest you read my post again, I was clearing up a comment someone made, in this thread, in error about an interview by Punkturis on AT10. Also, who is the dev not involved in the development process that you refer to?

callidus can you post a link of that thread pls?

I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature.

so you admit that you could also have handled things better? (not laying all the blame on you but you understand what i mean)

CCP RubberBAND made a great post summarising all the issues you guys posted all over the forums into one thread - they are working on it and will continue to do so .. or they can spend all day posting on the forums about issues they already know about and not get any work done. Everyone knows the unified inventory isn't perfect, but they have already released fixes and will continue to do so.

perhaps it's "feedback" like this that is the problem. all most of you are saying is this is **** fix it, perhaps if you reworded what you were trying to get across we wouldn't be having these problems.

example: :your post: this inventory is sh!t and totally useless
:what you could have said instead] the inventory still needs work because -insert issue here- , maybe if you -insert useful resolution here- things would be easier for us players.


this is just an example, thus i am not saying that is exactly how you went about things

*snip
To follow up on CCP Affinity's post; releasing features as optional is something that we have a technical framework for, but: It's not possible in all cases and we can't do it for all features even when it's possible. In some cases it may not be possible to have the new and the old systems live side-by-side. We would have to maintain full backwards compatibility in the underlying frameworks to support the old systems and that might not always be possible or hamper the development of the new systems. We would not consider to do it for all features where it would be possible, for the reasons CCP Affinity mentioned above: Large code-dependencies and maintenance burden.

In general, we would possibly consider this when releasing new features but in general not when re-factoring older systems.

I came to the forum after finding myself very dissatisfied with the inventory UI, only to find many, many people also dissatisfied with the inventory UI.

I understand you guys want to make EVE as playable on a 15" 1024x768 monitor as possible by stuffing everything in one UI window, but some players are starting to use larger screens and like to have multiple containers or windows open side by side for convenience's sake. This should be the default behavior, not the one that needs a hotkey.

I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow

The proposal is valid and I will look at ways to solve this problem, I just need to sit down with Soundwave and a UI programmers to see how much work it would be and when we could do it. We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc.


We will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window).

The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?

Aww your bots broke *tear* I am so sorry this happened to you.
Uni. Inv. --> Loot All --> Job done (believe it or not, dragging and dropping can lead to carpel-tunnel, CCP is doing you a favor).

/me - sits back with popcorn and continues to watch the bot-owners go into melt-down mode over lost-profits.

1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was".

What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck.

(UI is an acronym for User Interface.)

To give answere to this question, if you mean anything related to the Unified Inventory... then yes! :)
(as long as you don't affect stuff not related to the inventory, like show info in new window or same ...)

Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the Shift discussion. As pointed out here, there already is a setting in the Esc Menu related to reverting Shift behavior, so it might make sense to have this behavior tied with that setting. Hopefully those that already use that setting will also want the Inventory Shift function to be reverted.



Interesting point, this would solve it very gracefully. I have added it to our Iteration plan, thank you.

No, it's this one:

ESC Menu under "General Settings - Windows"
"Try to Use Existing Info Window if Any (Except if Shift is Pressed)"

We would need to change the description for the setting toggle though, to describe better what it's doing regarding Shift click.

Something along the line of:
"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)"

The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.

So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:

• Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
• Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
• Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.

Is this accurate for how the setting would function?

This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree.

With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable?

So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space).

Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.

Was it deployed? I haven't seen a patch and/or client update.