EVE Search - The very few features CQ needs to not be hated.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The very few features CQ needs to not be hated.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Taedrin Gallente The Green Cross Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.06.11 16:00:00 - [121] The issue for CCP isn't that it is hard to not delete something. The issue is that it is hard to maintain two sets of code which accomplish the same thing. If they keep both the old and new station environments active in the code at once, that is twice as much testing that needs to be done. Every change in their code now has one more additional thing that they can break, so they have to do all the more QA testing to make sure it doesn't break. IMO, what CCP should do is what they did with the trinity engine release: Temporarily maintain both sets of code, while you give players a chance to upgrade. Schedule the code for deletion, but give players a significant amount of warning before you do so. Several months at least. ---------- Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident" Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.11 16:13:00 - [122] Originally by: Taedrin The issue for CCP isn't that it is hard to not delete something. The issue is that it is hard to maintain two sets of code which accomplish the same thing. If they keep both the old and new station environments active in the code at once, that is twice as much testing that needs to be done. Every change in their code now has one more additional thing that they can break, so they have to do all the more QA testing to make sure it doesn't break. IMO, what CCP should do is what they did with the trinity engine release: Temporarily maintain both sets of code, while you give players a chance to upgrade. Schedule the code for deletion, but give players a significant amount of warning before you do so. Several months at least. this only makes sense if you have the Hanger and CQ do the same thing.... But they shouldn't do the same thing. The whole point is that they are trying to make one feature perform to different functions with often mutually contradictory requirements... Take a look at this post for one tiny example. Also this thread deals with the issue. And on the amount of testing needing to be done and such, They will be iterating on space and the in space UI, they will be iterating on Incarna and the In Incarna UI, If the hanger and CQ are separate then those changes don't overlap and don't interfere with each other... If CQ is made to do both then they do overlap and can both affect each other. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Tobiaz Spacerats	Posted - 2011.06.11 16:38:00 - [123] Originally by: Hannibal Ord Another point is that for gods sake, ship spinning is as iconic as the Raven hull or Aura saying "Warp drive Active" or something like that. Do we really want it gone? I will miss it. CCP cares little. They changed the Scorpion into this symmetrical and ridiculous looking bug, and now the Maller and Sacrilege are being 'upgraded' as well to look like a shinier version of the Minmatar design. How long until the Raven is smooth and symmetrical all races's ships have the same style except for a different color and all T2-bits are gone? Seriously though: CCP should just make the docking a 2 phase process. First you dock and you get the 'old' interface with ship-spinning and 2 sec loading time. And from there you can 'unpod' loading the CQ interface. I can't think of any good argument against this. If you're going to lounge in your CQ, the additional 2 secs really don't matter and if you're just changing ships, you skip everything that people are now so ****ed about. EVE always had a big benefit of not being insane on the hardware specs. In that view CQ is a stupid move and can REALLY hurt their subscriptions (since a lot of the 50k logged in users are multiboxed alts. In this light it's tempting to be pro-CQ though
Andreus Ixiris Gallente Mixed Metaphor	Posted - 2011.06.11 16:44:00 - [124] Make CQ optional. ----- Andreus Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.11 16:50:00 - [125] Edited by: Akita T on 11/06/2011 16:54:22 Originally by: Abriael VonRosen Just a partly unrelated heads up, if your GTX460 gets to 72 degrees with ANY game (or to 56 with something as light as the stations), either your video card fan is damaged, or you need to work on the airflow in your case. The near 30-ish degrees Celsius ambient temperature was/is the problem... my room peaks at over 40C during summer afternoons - windows are facing westwards and always open (smoking in the room, AC would be nigh-useless), no buildings nor trees obstructing the sun until very late in the afternoon, up to 700W (or maybe even 800W) worth of gear churning away nearly constantly (my desktop, big CRT, household server and the LAN switch, big room fan, speakers), heavy curtain and fan does very little to compensate. Heck, I get a relatively steady +5 Celsius mid-winter nights with the windows slightly cracked open and fan running on low speed, when outside it's full of snow ! _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Syphon Lodian Gallente	Posted - 2011.06.11 18:29:00 - [126] Edited by: Syphon Lodian on 11/06/2011 18:30:00 In this thread: A bunch of people who neglect the fact that CCP had a 'vision' prior to starting their development of EVE, and "space only" was a compromise because tech and funding wasn't there to start what we are just now seeing; Avatars, CQ and so on. EVE was never intended to be space-only. This is the first real move into a "non-space" addition, and you people go ape-***. This isn't a new plan, or surprising at all. We knew this was coming for years, and years. An optional CQ would be reasonable, if they made the option RP. -- When you dock, "Do you wish to disembark or would you like to load the hangar API, pilot?"* -- Possibly allow "Remember Choice".
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.06.11 18:56:00 - [127] Originally by: Taedrin The issue for CCP isn't that it is hard to not delete something. The issue is that it is hard to maintain two sets of code which accomplish the same thing. But that's just it: it wouldn't be two sets of code ù it would be one set of code used in two places. All the UI elements will be retained in both environments and will look exactly the same: going into the market interface in Incarna will look just like going into the market interface outside of Incarna. Sure, at some point in the future, there might be Incarna-specific UI elements, eg. when we get bars and the like, but there will still not be any duplication of effort for the simple reason that they are Incarna-specific ù there is no need (and indeed, no point) to duplicate it to the non-Incarna environment. The situation with Trinity was almost completely different: they had to make all 3D assets twice. That is not the case here. They only have to do things once, and either display it in two places, or simply not display it at all in once for those who don't want to deal with it. 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
Raimo Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2011.06.11 19:15:00 - [128] Supporting the OP ----------
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.12 21:04:00 - [129] Originally by: Syphon Lodian In this thread: A bunch of people who neglect the fact that CCP had a 'vision' prior to starting their development of EVE, and "space only" was a compromise because tech and funding wasn't there to start what we are just now seeing; Avatars, CQ and so on. I don't know about the others, but I personally like the idea of having more than just the spaceship part. I just don't like the fact we HAVE to "get out of the pod" every time we dock. Quote: An optional CQ would be reasonable, if they made the option RP. -- When you dock, "Do you wish to disembark or would you like to load the hangar API, pilot?" -- Possibly allow "Remember Choice". Well, they (more or less recently) said that they'll also make it so that you can select WHERE in the CQ you get materialized when you dock or login or whatever (right now, when you dock, you're on the balcony, but when you login you're near the couch, with no way to change that). I suppose having an extra default selection of "hangar view" available would be the simplest way. But that would mean they'd keep the hangar view, which (lately) they repeatedly said they're going to just delete. Oh well... _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Salpun Gallente Paramount Commerce	Posted - 2011.06.12 21:11:00 - [130] Edited by: Salpun on 12/06/2011 21:12:24 I think we will get our desired ship spinning view back. ie camera drone view it will just take some time. Having the cameria point towards the hanger or towards the rest of the CQ needs to be a choise to.

Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.12 21:30:00 - [131] Originally by: Salpun Edited by: Salpun on 12/06/2011 21:12:24 I think we will get our desired ship spinning view back. ie camera drone view it will just take some time. Having the cameria point towards the hanger or towards the rest of the CQ needs to be a choise to. The problem here is to get CCP to leave the ship-spin view in the game before they are through taking it out completely. Otherwise this will turn into another engine trail or the AF's 4-th bonus deal - years will go by with nothing being done. ... If you like choice please support this topic in the Assembly Hall. Thanks.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.13 19:54:00 - [132] bump, Incarna release is getting close and this thread has good points in it that need addressing. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Tugrath Akers	Posted - 2011.06.13 20:27:00 - [133] I sure hope they retrofit all of the Customs offices with hangers and ship fitting capabilities.
Abdiel Kavash Caldari Paladin Order Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.06.13 21:10:00 - [134] Edited by: Abdiel Kavash on 13/06/2011 21:10:36 Just want to add my voice in here. I am looking forward to Walking in Stations, I have been ever since I heard of it. Most of all I would like to see my in-game friends "face to face" some day. HOWEVER, I am NOT looking forward to having to load all that crap every time I need to dock to change ships or buy ammo or pick up cargo. What used to be "dock, drag an icon from one pile to another, undock" will now get interrupted by a long-ass loading screen loading something I have no intention of using. "Get a better computer" you say. I have had this machine for about 1.5 years, and it runs EVE in all its current glory very well, and I expected it to do so for at least another year or so. However even the character creator runs at about 1 FPS for me. And I am not sure whether walking around in my own little closet is worth a hardware upgrade just yet. --- Originally by: Sporked EVE IS DYING RUN TO THE HILLS! WE MIGHT HAVE TO ENGAGE WITH OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS MMO! THEY MIGHT SHOOT AT US WHILE WE ARE BUSY HOLDING HANDS AND FROLICKING! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Cloora APEX Unlimited APEX Conglomerate	Posted - 2011.06.13 22:32:00 - [135] OP is right. Keep the current hanger view. Petition signed ------------------------------------------ CEO and Major Shareholder of the APEX Conglomerate Producer of Starsi brand softdrinks and Torped-Os! brand cereal as well as many other fine products
Brujo Loco Amarr Brujeria Teologica	Posted - 2011.06.13 22:59:00 - [136] Hmmm, I have mixed feelings, I have a decent enough GPU/CPU combo to support CQ, and to consider peoples crap puters into not running the client efficiently is something Im not either against or in favor. Keeping computer specs low for some people MIGHT be ok, but honestly, I think they are in a minority, this reminds me of the old shader model being made obsolete and the ruckus in the forums back in the day, when practically everything was retextured, or when back in the day EQ stopped supporting Win95 . I think we must consider this isnt WOW nor a Blizzard game made for computers as old as grandma. In a year most 100$ or less gpus will run CQ optimally anyway and several mid priced GPUS can run it now np either. Leaving an option for not loading CQ and just using the old system might seem ok. But I think backwards compatibility with older systems is more of a step in the wrong direction. Change is good, for better or worst, in the long run is always for the better. --- Viva VENEZUELA!!! Archipelago Theory
Andreus Ixiris Gallente Mixed Metaphor	Posted - 2011.06.13 23:08:00 - [137] I would like to remind everyone in this thread, if you didn't already know, that this expansion will permanently remove the following functionality: - Drag-and-drop ship to main screen to activate a ship - Double-click on main screen to access active ship cargo hold - Right-click on main screen to access active ship drop-down ----- Andreus Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.13 23:18:00 - [138] Originally by: Andreus Ixiris I would like to remind everyone in this thread, if you didn't already know, that this expansion will permanently remove the following functionality: - Drag-and-drop ship to main screen to activate a ship - Double-click on main screen to access active ship cargo hold - Right-click on main screen to access active ship drop-down you forgot ship spinning, the ability to drag drop things into ship, the ability to do anything other than peer at your ship from a great distance from the balcony. Have a safe, stable, low CPU/grfx intensive simple easy to use environment upon docking, instead of an unstable, Highest cpu/grfx intensive environment upon docking. It also totally screws those who want Incarna by tying the Incarna UI to the in space UI. So instead of getting a proper UI that works in the environment, and is optimised to work in stations, you get the old UI, that isn't optimised for anything, but is designed for space, and being in hanger, and covers up everything you want/need to see in Incarna with windows. It doesn't matter if you do, or do not, want incarna, or could care less either way. removing the old hanger view and replacing it with CQ is detrimental, both in the short and long terms. In fact it gets worse as time goes on. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Obsidian Hawk RONA Legion RONA Directorate	Posted - 2011.06.14 00:37:00 - [139] Damnit akita you had to do this before it was release rather than 2 weeks ago. Supported.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.18 08:48:00 - [140] 3 more days until massive hate floods the forums _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts

Doctor Deals	Posted - 2011.06.18 09:35:00 - [141] The China server should still have ship spinning.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.18 10:01:00 - [142] Originally by: Akita T 3 more days until massive hate floods the forums Who do you think will be the most ****ed? Miners? Mission Runners? PVPers? Traders? Roleplayers? Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.18 11:00:00 - [143] Originally by: Tres Farmer Originally by: Akita T 3 more days until massive hate floods the forums Who do you think will be the most ****ed? Miners? Mission Runners? PVPers? Traders? Roleplayers? Station-spinners _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Zora'e Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.06.18 11:15:00 - [144] The newest build on SISI isn't terribly bad. On low settings I can handle three clients in space reasonably well. However, trying to dock all three at the same time took 1 1/2 minutes instead of the less than 15 seconds docking three clients on TQ takes. As this was the test server and there wasn't anybody around to see how long my ship hung in space, I have no idea if I docked immediately (normally) and the delay was due to loading CQ or if I hung in space that entire time. On SISI: My GPU used 900 megs off the 1 gig available on it. It used 65-75% of the GPU's overall processing power, and my temps stayed down between 60-70c running three clients. On TQ: My GPU used 285 megs off the 1 gig available on it. It used 50-54% of the GPU's overall processing power, and my temps stayed down between 55-60c running three clients. On SISI: My computers processor (overclocked 10%)... was buried at 100% utilization the entire time after loading the second client, docked or in space. On TQ: My computers processor (overclocked 10%)... was at 37% utilization and only jumped to 75% after undocking (this was running three clients). Thankfully this evening is cool as it is only 22c instead of my normal 30-32c. But... what this does show is that I will be able to run 3 clients in space, docking however will be a pita. ~Z -
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.19 09:51:00 - [145] TWO more days to crapstorm. Oh, come on, CCP, so very little you have to do for us to not end up hating this junk, yet... _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.19 10:13:00 - [146] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 19/06/2011 10:15:12 Originally by: Akita T TWO more days to crapstorm. Oh, come on, CCP, so very little you have to do for us to not end up hating this junk, yet... You're still hoping, don't ya? I think the first time this really dawned on me and I lost my virginity in this regard was your post about screwed T3 drops and then later again that post about tech. Man, that T3 stuff is now 2 years ago, isn't it? Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Dasola Minmatar	Posted - 2011.06.19 10:22:00 - [147] Originally by: Taedrin The issue for CCP isn't that it is hard to not delete something. The issue is that it is hard to maintain two sets of code which accomplish the same thing. If they keep both the old and new station environments active in the code at once, that is twice as much testing that needs to be done. Every change in their code now has one more additional thing that they can break, so they have to do all the more QA testing to make sure it doesn't break. IMO, what CCP should do is what they did with the trinity engine release: Temporarily maintain both sets of code, while you give players a chance to upgrade. Schedule the code for deletion, but give players a significant amount of warning before you do so. Several months at least. Since when has ccp done even basic play testing, etc? Newer, they let their customers test it. This is my opinion based on little things like ship flying backwards after last extension + tons of other crap theyr QA should have catched before releases multiply times. Its no trouble at all to maintain two station eviroments, after all current one is well tested by now after years of use. Unless of course ccp devs comments about codebase being better shape then ever is lie and its full of spagethy code... Sadly ccp has strong history of makeing promises and then failing to uphold them. After all they did promise that all this station walk stuff would be optional.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.06.19 10:52:00 - [148] Edited by: Akita T on 19/06/2011 10:53:03 Originally by: Tres Farmer I think the first time this really dawned on me and I lost my virginity in this regard was your post about screwed T3 drops and then later again that post about tech. Man, that T3 stuff is now 2 years ago, isn't it? What about the one about a reworking of the way minerals are obtained ? That's almost 4 years old. Granted, parts of it were implemented. Tiny parts. The least relevant parts. _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Arec Bardwin	Posted - 2011.06.19 10:59:00 - [149] Originally by: Akita T TWO more days to crapstorm. Oh, come on, CCP, so very little you have to do for us to not end up hating this junk, yet... Originally by: Tres Farmer You're still hoping, don't ya? I think the first time this really dawned on me and I lost my virginity in this regard was your post about screwed T3 drops and then later again that post about tech. Man, that T3 stuff is now 2 years ago, isn't it? Oh, man! I forgot about that Incarna/Captain's Quarters WILL be mandatory. It's the only way people will actually use it. Crapstorm definitely incoming.
Mocam	Posted - 2011.06.19 11:11:00 - [150] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Tres Farmer Originally by: Akita T 3 more days until massive hate floods the forums Who do you think will be the most ****ed? Miners? Mission Runners? PVPers? Traders? Roleplayers? Station-spinners Beyond this - the fun one might be buy order pickup traders. Players may see a smaller buy ranges. 50+ stations in your buy range... Yeah the extra slowdown may have them shrink that range a bit in some areas. The current load times are onerous enough if you have a ton of stops to pick the stuff up, let alone taking longer with CQ.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.