| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 00:17:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Ben Alman on 08/02/2011 00:21:40 Edited by: Ben Alman on 08/02/2011 00:19:50
Quote: And scrolling through a list of 1800 people looking for that 1 wartarget ALSO loads those 1800 portraits, which is a significant performance cost and waste of HDD space. It would be nice to have the click-to-load option back, but I also wouldn't mind if loading portraits was turned off entirely. What would happen if I set the portraits cache folder to read-only? Would it break EVE?
First, thats what I said in my edit. Second, I'm trying it for you ;)
EDIT: Yes it works. Rightclick your cache/Pictures/characters/chat folder Properties-->Security-->Edit... Set SYSTEM to DENY modify and write --> OK (Win7)
However I have no idea if that generates long error logs somewhere (write operation failed on....)
|

Venta Vendita
Gallente North American Euro Space Agency
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 00:21:00 -
[62]
what you guys should be doing is handling this whole thing in a different way. Your "I can't track people" has jack sh*t to do with loading portraits so stop trolling on this subject to try to get your way.
What you need to do is make a proposal thread to add more 'icons, symbols' to the players in chat (just like how you set standings and will show you the red - or the blue +). Well add a couple icons to the set standings and problem solved. We all walk away happy.
|

Catheryn Martobi
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 00:33:00 -
[63]
Has anyone considered this may be a stealth attack on botting?
I figure the biggest problem macro miners/ratters do so in large groups in nullsec. In order to recognize when an enemy enters the system the bot keeps an eye on local for blank faces and warps off. Ensuring there are no blank faces prevents these bots from working and they have to either mine by themselves in the system or risk not recognizing an enemy.
|

iP0D
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 00:47:00 -
[64]
I wish loading portraits was optional and had a setting for it. Then again, I also wish I could do that for space backgrounds. Not because of attempts at tuning the client for more fps in fleet battles or something like that. No, just because I am still waiting for CCP to introduce a little compensation for some usability changes which were not exactly fun for people with visual deficiencies.
|

Venta Vendita
Gallente North American Euro Space Agency
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 01:03:00 -
[65]
Originally by: iP0D I wish loading portraits was optional and had a setting for it. Then again, I also wish I could do that for space backgrounds. Not because of attempts at tuning the client for more fps in fleet battles or something like that. No, just because I am still waiting for CCP to introduce a little compensation for some usability changes which were not exactly fun for people with visual deficiencies.
Did you even read this thread? Whether you load them or not will have no affect on 'lag' or give you more FPS. If your 'lagging' then the problem lies with your computer specs not the client or eve server.
"This means that the client isn't loading graphic assets and running rendering code for characters in the background while you are flying in space, it will just fetch the character portraits via the internet as if you were browsing a web page. This also means that the client doesn't have to ask the server for characters appearances in order to render them, so we are freeing up server resources too. We also offload all the bandwidth to our Content Delivery Network (CDN) so that we aren't using up the link to Tranquility with requests for images - and as all requests for images go to our CDN it should be extremely fast wherever you are in the world."
|

Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 01:06:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Venta Vendita
Originally by: iP0D I wish loading portraits was optional and had a setting for it. Then again, I also wish I could do that for space backgrounds. Not because of attempts at tuning the client for more fps in fleet battles or something like that. No, just because I am still waiting for CCP to introduce a little compensation for some usability changes which were not exactly fun for people with visual deficiencies.
Did I even read this post? Whether you load them or not will have no affect on 'lag' or give you more FPS. If your 'lagging' then the problem lies with your computer specs not the client or eve server.
"This means that the client isn't loading graphic assets and running rendering code for characters in the background while you are flying in space, it will just fetch the character portraits via the internet as if you were browsing a web page. This also means that the client doesn't have to ask the server for characters appearances in order to render them, so we are freeing up server resources too. We also offload all the bandwidth to our Content Delivery Network (CDN) so that we aren't using up the link to Tranquility with requests for images - and as all requests for images go to our CDN it should be extremely fast wherever you are in the world."
Fixed
|

Aera Aiana
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 01:19:00 -
[67]
Originally by: mkmin Ah I see. It's the "performance matters, but no, it doesn't really" argument. Got it.
I still maintain my own position that based on the FACT that loading ANY extra new data MUST cause a performance hit should be reason enough to give us the option of opting out, especially since the code was already there with the old system.
At some point in development EVE probably also rendered models without textures. That doesn't mean there has to be an option to turn them off now. Performance is not everything. It matters, but so does appearance.
Originally by: mkmin And scrolling through a list of 1800 people looking for that 1 wartarget ALSO loads those 1800 portraits, which is a significant performance cost and waste of HDD space.
Those portraits are about 8KB each. There is nothing "significant" about it.
Originally by: mkmin It would be nice to have the click-to-load option back, but I also wouldn't mind if loading portraits was turned off entirely. What would happen if I set the portraits cache folder to read-only? Would it break EVE?
Maybe if it was some ini-file setting, but the options menu already contains enough trash. - Don't let the trolls stop you from giving a helpful reply. :) |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 01:24:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Aera Aiana Maybe if it was some ini-file setting, but the options menu already contains enough trash.
The options menu already contained pretty much that exact option. It was removed with the new system. All they need to do is bring it backà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |

mkmin
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 09:51:00 -
[69]
For Windows XP users who want to set the portrait cache to read only, there are a few more steps you've gotta take. This assumes you know your way around a windows computer, and are smart enough to fix it if you change your mind.
Step 1: go to Control Panel -> Folder Options -> uncheck "simple file sharing"
Step 2: navigate to .\Documents and Settings\%user%\Local Settings\Application Data\CCP\EVE\%eve's install location%_tranquility\cache\pictures\characters\
step 3: right-click chat folder -> properties -> security
step 4: for each group/user check "deny" for "write"
So far I love the snappiness this returns to the client that was lost with Incursions 3, and yes, I can see a dramatic difference. Next step is to figure out how to manually add the portraits of people I actually care about.
Be aware, CCP may consider this optimization "bad." Also be aware, that if you screw up your own computer by not understanding my instructions, sucks to be you, it's your own fault.
|

Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 10:11:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Aera Aiana At some point in development EVE probably also rendered models without textures. That doesn't mean there has to be an option to turn them off now. Performance is not everything. It matters, but so does appearance.
Now that you mention it, that would be a great option to have.
Neither performance nor appearance are everything, options are everything. -
I wish I was a three foot tall doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes |

Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 13:56:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Aera Aiana At some point in development EVE probably also rendered models without textures. That doesn't mean there has to be an option to turn them off now. Performance is not everything. It matters, but so does appearance.
Now that you mention it, that would be a great option to have.
Neither performance nor appearance are everything, options are everything.
I agree. Most of the time in fleet combat you don't even have the time (or the need) to watch at the actual space. Your too busy managing modules, distances and targeting too watch at how your ship is responding (and, honestly... Who does even see any ship during fleet combat? it's just a little dot at the center of the screen).
If a "simulation-like" screen could be used (and it was beneficial to performance) in such situations, I'd be all for giving the chance to use it. Something like the old mini map they had back in the day... Symbols, 3 d space and low amount of graphics to be digested by the client.
Kinda like this: http://xavnet.nl/eve/2002.12.20.20.48.49.jpg, only with the small 3d map in the corner as a full view instead of the normal view. As an option of course.
|

Skippermonkey
Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 14:18:00 -
[72]
lol @ this thread
this is months and months of hard work, and you be damned if you think CCP are going to let you ignore it
You're waiting for an ibis, an ibis that will take you far away. You know where you hope this ibis will take you, but you can't be sure. But it doesn't matter - because we'll be together. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |