EVE Search - Q. for a DEV: Why is CCP removing the hangar view as an option?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Q. for a DEV: Why is CCP removing the hangar view as an option?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 16:50:00 - [1] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 16:56:22 I'm making this thread in an attempt to get a straight answer from one of CCPs Developers. For how many times has this been asked by both myself and other people, and yet I still have not seen a straight answer to the question. Why are you removing the hangar view as an option? What purpose does it serve to force players (even veterans) to always use the CQ? Why not keep both and allow the player to switch between the Hangar View and the Captains Quarters environment at will? My argument: If this is all about the new player experience: simply force new players to use the CQ until after the tutorial or only allow them to access their tutorials from the CQ. Why have you changed your stance on this? 3 years ago you had the right idea, to create the captains quarters as a separate area to the hangar. To me it does not make sense to force players to use the captains quarters all the time, both in terms of immersion, performance and gameplay. Immersion wise it does not make sense because: Its not easy to enter and exit your pod, why would I as a pod pilot decide to exit my pod when all I want to do is change from one ship to another and undock again. Wouldn't it be much easier to allow the player to dock either to the hangar as is right now, OR dock and disembark directly to the captains quarters, but only when a player wishes to do this. Adding another Dock command (Dock & Disembark) is all it would take to allow players to go directly to the CQ when docking. By keeping the hangar and the CQ seperate, CCP could also at a later date decide to add additional flair to the CQ, like optional cutscenes when you enter/exit your pod or when you have been podded and receive a new clone. Performance wise it does not make sense because: Low end systems, as well as people who have multiple accounts running, according to a recent blog, are advised to use the "temporary" DISABLE CQ OPTION. Not to mention CQ loading times are longer than hangar loading times because the CQ requires almost a gig of system memory. By keeping the current hangar view as an alternative to the CQ, this problem is solved in a much more graceful way, without screwing older PCs. If both the CQ and the Hangar are kept, any problems POST patch will only affect the Captains Quarters. By forcing players to use the CQ, by removing the normal hangar view, any uncaught bugs will effect the entire EVE population. Gameplay wise it does not make sense because: CCP has always had the goal to create the most expansive universe. Why remove the ability to stay inside your ship and just view the hangar when docked. Not all ships when seen from the hangar balcony in the CQ are properly representive of their true size (due to the re-positioning mechanic that brings smaller ships closer to the balcony.) By keeping the hangar view you would allow players another way to judge scale, and still allow them to look around their ships and the hangar. The player always seems to spawn on the end of the hangar balcony, walking into the other section of the CQ every time is tiresome... which will cause a lot of people to stick to the NeoCom, why even force players to load the CQ environment then. Some players will use the CQ, others won't, most I recon (me included) will use it when they want to use it, and otherwise just want to use the hangar view as it is right now. Forcing it on people isn't going to make them any happier... --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Alpine 69 Rubbish Superheroes	Posted - 2011.06.15 16:52:00 - [2] Definitely agree with all points made. /Signed. -
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.15 16:55:00 - [3] /signed. It would be really nice for a response from the devs on this whole issue.
Simetraz	Posted - 2011.06.15 16:57:00 - [4] incarna and multiple client users CCP Zulu DEV BLOG "For the sake of a smooth transition we therefore decided to temporarily add the option to not load the Incarna interiors while stilll retaining full access to all options and menus." You might want to read it.
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.15 16:59:00 - [5] Originally by: Simetraz incarna and multiple client users CCP Zulu DEV BLOG "For the sake of a smooth transition we therefore decided to temporarily add the option to not load the Incarna interiors while stilll retaining full access to all options and menus." You might want to read it. You might want to read the op.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:02:00 - [6] Hi.... Well put but... not really new... See Here Here petition Here Here Here Here And my biggest problem with it Here The more this issue is raised, the better. But It's worth looking to see what has already been said on the issue :-) Although given the lack of search features on this site. A lot of those threads in general are being drowned out by MT and DDoS threads. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:03:00 - [7] Originally by: Soden Rah Hi.... Well put but... not really new... See Here Here petition Here Here Here Here And my biggest problem with it Here The more this issue is raised, the better. But It's worth looking to see what has already been said on the issue :-) Although given the lack of search features on this site. A lot of those threads in general are being drowned out by MT and DDoS threads. Yeah I know Soden. It's pretty depressing ain't it.
Aessaya Fairlight Corp Rooks and Kings	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:04:00 - [8] I totally agree with the OP. While i'm looking forward to CQ and incarna overall, i would really like to be able to choose whether i'd like to exit my pod and go walk around in stations or just switch ships and undock again. It makes no sense in forcing ppl to use the CQ. Besides, all the "eve is still runnable on low-end systems is utter bull****, tbh. While my pc isn't top-of-the-line, it does its jub, and i lose 80% of the performance fps-wise while in CQ. Explain this.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:05:00 - [9] I am aware of those threads, However, none of them have actually answered this particular question. Since Incarna's release is only days away, I felt it was time to take the issue head on and ask for a straight answer directly. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Saint Lazarus Pwn 'N Play Chaos Theory Alliance	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:05:00 - [10] /signed CCP adamantly refuse to answer these questions with a straight answer for months now, I dont expect them to respond to this (with anything other than the vague dismissive replies already). But maybe just MAYBE.......we can get a reason as to WHY we cant get an answer ----------------- My EvE Comic
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:08:00 - [11] +1 - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:15:00 - [12] Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. ... If you like choice please support this topic in the Assembly Hall. Thanks.
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:19:00 - [13] CQ will destroy my immersion. Completely destroy it. I live in a wormhole. As you all know, wormhole pilots ain't quite right. One thing, when we dock, we tend to gtfo as fast as we can to get to the quiet comforts of w-Space. We don't get out of our pods. Please don't force us out of our pods. They keep the germs of the others off us. They keep the others from looking at us. You can't trust the others. The pods keep us safe. Don't force us out of the pods.
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:26:00 - [14] Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. If that really is the design reason behind this. Sad times.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 17:43:00 - [15] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 17:43:46 Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Ironically and sadly this is the most justified explanation yet... However if this were to be true, I would seriously question CCPs commitment to the game... and mine. I most certainly wouldn't be a happy customer if design decisions now and in future were going to be motivated by a cash-shop. Especially considering this is only the start of Incarna, annoying people like that is more likely to drive people away than keep them interested long enough for the cash-shop to become effective. Besides, since there more in depth incarna expansions to come out in the future, why force it in when its always better to develop something naturally over time. Regardless, I'd still like to hear a straight and honest answer from CCP. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Sandviched	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:04:00 - [16] -10/10 tribibad troll
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:17:00 - [17] Originally by: Sandviched -10/10 tribibad troll Yes if I were trolling this would be a horrible trolling thread, but since this is a genuine question, go seek your sandviches somewhere else. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Sandviched	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:28:00 - [18] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Originally by: Sandviched -10/10 tribibad troll Yes if I were trolling this would be a horrible trolling thread, but since this is a genuine question, go seek your sandviches somewhere else. I'm sorry, am I messing up your perfect carebear dream? If your computer can't handle incarna then why complain? it's your fault your computer can't handle it? not ccp's also it's their product.. they can do what thy want with it.. not you
Alpine 69 Rubbish Superheroes	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:44:00 - [19] Edited by: Alpine 69 on 15/06/2011 18:44:38 Originally by: Sandviched Originally by: Hyperforce99 Originally by: Sandviched -10/10 tribibad troll Yes if I were trolling this would be a horrible trolling thread, but since this is a genuine question, go seek your sandviches somewhere else. I'm sorry, am I messing up your perfect carebear dream? If your computer can't handle incarna then why complain? it's your fault your computer can't handle it? not ccp's also it's their product.. they can do what thy want with it.. not you How exactly does not wanting to watch a person walk around in a station all the time make someone a carebear? Last time I checked being one had to do with actions in space. And as for "it's their product, they can do what they want with it", what they'll want to do with their product is tailor it to the wants and needs of their customer base. Hyperforce99 is merely clearing up what at least a part of said customer base wants, and asking for CCP's stance on the matter. -
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:46:00 - [20] While I appreciate the response and I agree with you. Its best not to feed the troll and let them simply hunger away. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.06.15 18:48:00 - [21] Originally by: Sandviched If your computer can't handle incarna then why complain? If every time you started Windows, every app in the Adobe Creative Suite started up as well, would you complain that it was completely pointless and unnecessary, even if your computer had no problem running all of them at once and even if you could do other stuff while they were loading? 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
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.15 19:22:00 - [22] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 16:56:22Adding another Dock command (Dock & Disembark) is all it would take to allow players to go directly to the CQ when docking. I agree with you but cringed on this point. two dock commands on the same menu is beyond ******ed. Default dock should be to the hangar, with a 2nd button right above undock that lets you leave the ship and walk into the station. Either that or a simple check box in the settings for whichever you prefer. The EVE Personality Test
Katrina Cortez	Posted - 2011.06.15 19:39:00 - [23] Yeah... i personally feel the whole game is going to go to ****. They are forcing you to use it because if they dont then there is no reason to buy their crap and if you see other people wearing the latest stuff it might make you want to buy it. I think the whole station thing is going to be bad for the mechanics currently in game (as docking mechanics will be changed) and for those with slower computers/connections. You can probably expect to get spammed when you log in for all the new vanity items as well.
Katra Novac	Posted - 2011.06.15 19:52:00 - [24] So you dock a ship and you get the loading screen but instead of being in a hanger you're in the CQ. Still only one load screen, as long as you can do everything from the CQ, I don't see a problem. Only thing you won't be able to do is sit in the hanger spinning your ship. Does that sound about right?
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.15 19:55:00 - [25] Edited by: Maul555 on 15/06/2011 19:56:00 Originally by: Katra Novac So you dock a ship and you get the loading screen but instead of being in a hanger you're in the CQ. Still only one load screen, as long as you can do everything from the CQ, I don't see a problem. Only thing you won't be able to do is sit in the hanger spinning your ship. Does that sound about right? Bingo... Except that you spawn on the balcony overlooking your ship, and have to walk your but to your CQ if you want to go there. The EVE Personality Test
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.06.15 19:59:00 - [26] Originally by: Katra Novac So you dock a ship and you get the loading screen but instead of being in a hanger you're in the CQ. Still only one load screen, as long as you can do everything from the CQ, I don't see a problem. Only thing you won't be able to do is sit in the hanger spinning your ship. Does that sound about right? you have two accounts watch the EVE footprint reaching 3GB when you dock both. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:01:00 - [27] Originally by: Aessaya Besides, all the "eve is still runnable on low-end systems is utter bull****, tbh. While my pc isn't top-of-the-line, it does its jub, and i lose 80% of the performance fps-wise while in CQ. Explain this. You have crappy hardware. Question answered. People always say they don't, and then proceed to tell how their machine can't cope with this or that feature in EVE. --
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:03:00 - [28] Edited by: Ranka Mei on 15/06/2011 20:03:52 Originally by: Grimpak you have two accounts watch the EVE footprint reaching 3GB when you dock both. So? Watch me still have 3G left (on my 6G machine; which is actually rather modest: ppl have 8G or 12G these days). --
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:10:00 - [29] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 20:12:12 For the record: I have a 1 year old high end gaming laptop with a 330M Geforce and 6 gigs of memory and a I7-CPU that I play EVE on. When I tried the most recent CQ test on duality, Loading times were substantially higher due to CQ being loaded. When I tried to run 2 accounts docked (in space is fine) my game started running rough. Even with 6 Gigs of memory to use, its a massive increase in demand on my system compared to what eve uses now. I'm a student of game development myself (third years), and such an increase in resource demand for a game as massive as EVE-online is not something to take lightly. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:10:00 - [30] You are forced to the CQ so you can see ... "Special, Today Only, Quaffe Pants! 3 Aurum, get em while supplies last!"
Snake Scofield	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:10:00 - [31] Im just gonna dock quickly to change ammo/hardeners. Doh.
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:11:00 - [32] the "lightness" of the client has been a major attraction for me to eve. I like to keep a game open while i'm sometimes doing other things on the web, and in the end that makes me play more. (whether thats good for me or not is another question... does it distract me from work or does it let me do some work , checking and responding to emails, looking something up etc, while playing the game?) In general I like to have many programs open.. if i need to close eve because I'm helping my kids on and off on an illustrator project and the two together are taxing on my video card and memory, thats definitely a bad thing. I tend to turn all my graphics settings to low in games... even though I now have a pretty good computer (at the start of my five year replacement cycle)
Pr1ncess Alia	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:13:00 - [33] Originally by: Hyperforce99 I most certainly wouldn't be a happy customer if design decisions now and in future were going to be motivated by a cash-shop. Prepare to not be a happy customer. --- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved
Kewso	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:14:00 - [34] Edited by: Kewso on 15/06/2011 20:14:23 I don't get why people are worried about older systems my pc is older it's a dual core amd 3800 with 2 gigs kingston hyperx ram video card is a geforce 9800 1 gig memory on windows xp sp2 32 bit runs eve at like 200 fps with vsync off but i keep vsync on just so to keep things cooler. I was getting 80-100 fps in CQ and this is like 4-5 year old system.. if your computer is older than that it's time to upgrade and stop whining like some tard. ----------------------- A Dysfunctional Playground
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:16:00 - [35] Originally by: Hyperforce99 For the record: I have a 1 year old high end gaming laptop with a 330M Geforce and 6 gigs of memory and a I7-CPU that I play EVE on. When I tried the most recent CQ test on duality, Loading times were substantially higher due to CQ being loaded. When I tried to run 2 accounts docked (in space is fine) my game started running rough. Even with 6 Gigs of memory to use, its a massive increase in demand on my system compared to what eve uses now. You have a mobile graphics chipset: what did you expect? The 330M is 6.8x slower than my GTX 580, and is comparable to a weak GeForce 7800 GS. --
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:24:00 - [36] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 20:28:46 Originally by: Ranka Mei You have a mobile graphics chipset: what did you expect? The 330M is 6.8x slower than my GTX 580, and is comparable to a weak GeForce 7800 GS. Its still capable of running many new games among which the Witcher 2 on medium settings and Starcraft 2 on highest settings. Regardless, this GPU is capable of running several EVE clients without a problem as is. I paid 2000 euros for this rig a year ago, you really can't say its outdated. H.T.F.U. simply can not apply here, we are talking about a game that's played by a large demographic, a sudden mandatory increase in system resource requirements could mean the weaker part of the player demographic suddenly can't properly play the game, not the wisest business decision a company could make. The problem can be avoided however by simply not making Captains Quarters a mandatory feature by making it optional, preserving the hangar view as an alternative for those people. Not too long ago I read that Activision/Blizzard canceled an update on their WOW netcode that would have improved the network performance on their game for 99% of all players. The update however caused significant network problems on the remaining 1 % of the player base. When they eventually implemented the functionality they did so by allowing players (this 1%) to toggle to the old netcode. (Yes I know I mentioned WOW, get over it, its an example). --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Katra Novac	Posted - 2011.06.15 20:50:00 - [37] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Its still capable of running many new games among which the Witcher 2 on medium settings and Starcraft 2 on highest settings. But you're not trying to run Witcher 2 and Starcraft 2 twice like you are with Eve. Games (MMOs) evolve and the specs needed to run them evolve, even the required WoW specs have evolved over time. The problem here seem to be the amount of resources required have jumped quite a bit, coupled with the fact CCP encourage people to have more than one account. The fact they do encourage people to have more than one account suggests to me they should have an option to load the old hanger at least for the time being.
Bill Serkoff2	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:14:00 - [38] Signed hardcore.
Aglaia Adrastos	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:15:00 - [39] /Signed
Captain Mung	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:26:00 - [40] Why is it removed? So CCP can force their semi-******ed ideas down all their customers throats. Nevermind that many people want to at least have the option to stay in their pod and that it's "immersion breaking" in an update that supposed to "immerse" the players in EVE.
Djavo Selectus Pravus Lupus Transmission Lost	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:31:00 - [41] Completely unrelated but I really wish I could have just a plain black space background, not all this nebula ****e, nice and dark, black, dark, black, pitch black, can't see... awesome.
WiseMan Ari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:37:00 - [42] my biggest issue with this, is that we're loosing alot of functionality with the old hangars. I've always double clicked on the ship floating in station to open my cargo bay, and right clicked to open any of the other bays, like drone and fuel. Now i'll have to have the ships in station view open constantly to do that, and as i've always had "merge items and ships into station panel" ticked on, i'll now have to drop that option, and instead constantly have my ship and items hangars up for the same functionality. So basicly CCP is by forcing me to watch their pretty avatars, making it so i don't actually see anything in the station as my screen will be pretty much filled with open hangars [This space for rent] Support the NSPDP National Society For the Protection of Discriminated Pirates
Lonehawk	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:40:00 - [43] Unfortunately, we are dealing with a "company" here, not a friend. This company is out to make a profit and works by many formulas, this being one of them: Time = Money. ò The less time it takes us (the company) to get things done, the more money we make. ò The more time it takes for them (the customers) to get anything done, the more money we make. It's as simple as that really and expecting them to leave that mindset is like expecting a pyromaniac to sit around and twiddle his thumbs in a match factory. Sad but true. I will try to endure what ccp is doing, but if they go too far and break the game too much, I ain't gonna complain about it, I'll just quit and let my actions speak (as they always yell louder than words).
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.15 21:55:00 - [44] Yes, but considering the Hangar view is something that is already in the game and functional. At the simplest we are talking about the following to recreate the current hangar environment based of the CQ. 1 - Not or unloading the CQ, leaving just the hangar environment. 2 - switching to the original controls for the hangar. 3 - Using a different camera that centered around the ship. 4 - Re positioning the ships to the hangar center. 5 - Adding a button to switch between these 2 states. I'm aware this won't make it into the upcoming Incarna release. But it shouldn't have to take till the next expansion either to reinstate the hangar view either. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.15 23:51:00 - [45] Edited by: Razin on 15/06/2011 23:52:59 Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Hyperforce99 For the record: I have a 1 year old high end gaming laptop with a 330M Geforce and 6 gigs of memory and a I7-CPU that I play EVE on. When I tried the most recent CQ test on duality, Loading times were substantially higher due to CQ being loaded. When I tried to run 2 accounts docked (in space is fine) my game started running rough. Even with 6 Gigs of memory to use, its a massive increase in demand on my system compared to what eve uses now. You have a mobile graphics chipset: what did you expect? The 330M is 6.8x slower than my GTX 580, and is comparable to a weak GeForce 7800 GS. You're missing a major point: why worry about upgrading your resources to run fluff content that adds exactly zero to EVE gameplay? When (If) CCP adds some compelling game mechanics to Incarna they will find that players will use it even if they have to push extra interface buttans or upgrade their hardware to be able to do it. It's that simple. As things currently stand I want my ship-spinning hangar and a buttan in case I want to disembark. Why would you be against that??? ... If you like choice please support this topic in the Assembly Hall. Thanks.
Evelgrivion Gunpoint Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.06.15 23:58:00 - [46] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 16:56:22I'm making this thread in an attempt to get a straight answer from one of CCPs Developers. For how many times has this been asked by both myself and other people, and yet I still have not seen a straight answer to the question. "Incarna needs to be enforced to be compelling." That's why.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:01:00 - [47] Originally by: Evelgrivion Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 15/06/2011 16:56:22I'm making this thread in an attempt to get a straight answer from one of CCPs Developers. For how many times has this been asked by both myself and other people, and yet I still have not seen a straight answer to the question. "Incarna needs to be enforced to be compelling." That's why. It doesn't ... It really doesn't.... show reasoning behind random statement. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Evelgrivion Gunpoint Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:02:00 - [48] Originally by: Soden Rah It doesn't ... It really doesn't.... show reasoning behind random statement. I don't disagree, but I've been informed that this is the explanation within CCP for the removal of hangar view.
Gedid Tava Gallente The Kairos Syndicate Transmission Lost	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:03:00 - [49] Why is the "turn off CQ" option only temporary? Because they want it that way. I don't see how it isn't clear that CCP is vying for an avatar based mindspace. Incarna and Dust are just two small pieces of what they're doing with Carbon. They don't want people just being ships anymore. The goal is to remove that as something to think about so they're forcing the user to focus on a non-ship avatar. Who knows, in 200 years maybe we'll all just sleeve into our EVE toons when we're playing and they're setting the stage early. Regardless, the answer to "why" is "because it's their baby" and nothing more.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:05:00 - [50] Originally by: Evelgrivion Originally by: Soden Rah It doesn't ... It really doesn't.... show reasoning behind random statement. I don't disagree, but I've been informed that this is the explanation within CCP for the removal of hangar view. By whom? It don't recall ever seeing that in any dev blog, press statement, or Fanfest video. I can't see any logic to it, if its just been randomly made up by someone it should be killed off, if it IS internal CCP thought... Then they need to be taken out, given a good whacking, and have the error of their ways explained to them. If people are compelled to use Incarna... they WILL hate it. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:06:00 - [51] Do I think Incarna is a great addition. *Yes.* Do I want to see it everytime I dock. *No.* Is it unreasonable to ask for an option to either have CQ, or the present Hanger view load. *No it isn't.* It really is that simple. Originally by: Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it. Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.
Legio Praetor The Green Machine	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:11:00 - [52] +1
Kerrisone	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:14:00 - [53] Does anyone still work at CCP that might answer the numerous questions you haven't addressed in regards to these issues? Or can we take your silence as "Ambassador Recalled"?
Versuvius Marii	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:41:00 - [54] It should be possible to choose between the two upon docking; I would much rather ship spin when camped, and only go to CQ when I have to go for a bit of AFK. ============= Stupid Evepress is down. What's a carebear to do... =============
Myra2007 Millstone Industries	Posted - 2011.06.16 00:44:00 - [55] Originally by: Hyperforce99 I'm making this thread in an attempt to get a straight answer from one of CCPs Developers. Linkage -- Originally by: CCP Elais It was a great Frankenstein moment [...] to see the forum [...] come alive.
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Fleet of Doom RaVeN Federation	Posted - 2011.06.16 01:02:00 - [56] agree 100% with OP. and to OP, very well put.
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.16 01:17:00 - [57] Edited by: Maul555 on 16/06/2011 01:24:58 Originally by: WiseMan Ari my biggest issue with this, is that we're loosing alot of functionality with the old hangars. I've always double clicked on the ship floating in station to open my cargo bay, and right clicked to open any of the other bays, like drone and fuel. Now i'll have to have the ships in station view open constantly to do that, and as i've always had "merge items and ships into station panel" ticked on, i'll now have to drop that option, and instead constantly have my ship and items hangars up for the same functionality. So basicly CCP is by forcing me to watch their pretty avatars, making it so i don't actually see anything in the station as my screen will be pretty much filled with open hangars I do the exact same thing and I cant believe that I hadnt thought about how much CQ will screw with my docking routine. right click ship for drone bay... double click for cargo... yep. This is all basic stuff thats been around forever. Another good point is that forcing people to go to CQ will engender hate. All they need to do is to add a exit to station button in the hangar. This would be soooooo simple its beyond ******ed if they don't do it. This has been the single biggest issue as I see it with CQ and incarna. We just want the option. And I say all of this while eagerly awaiting CQ... I love the thought of stepping out of the Pod, just not on every damn dock! The EVE Personality Test
VicturusTeSaluto Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2011.06.16 01:19:00 - [58] I don't want anything to do with "captain's quarters" ambulation etc. let me disable it.
Ti Chi Minmatar Duct Tape Mechanics	Posted - 2011.06.16 01:36:00 - [59] It seems to me most people are basing load time on Duality, which CCP have stated is not optimised. On SiSi it looks like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hia4APr-T6w as you can see the UI is up almost instantly, and not any longer than normal, and the CQ loads almost straight afterwards. I suggest go and try out on SiSi if your concerned.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.16 02:35:00 - [60] Originally by: Ti Chi It seems to me most people are basing load time on Duality, which CCP have stated is not optimised. On SiSi it looks like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hia4APr-T6w as you can see the UI is up almost instantly, and not any longer than normal, and the CQ loads almost straight afterwards. I suggest go and try out on SiSi if your concerned. Most of this isn't about load times. It's about immersion and usability. Learn to read, moron. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Oregin Red Sky Morning BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.16 02:40:00 - [61] Edited by: Oregin on 16/06/2011 02:41:21 Much as I totally agree about the absurdity of whining about personal hardware limitations... I think its justified that people who CAN run CQ but with less than reasonable FPS are listened to. I'm sure there are a lot of machines out there can run EVE in its current form without a single issue but struggle to an immersion breaking level with CQ. The latest info being that you can choose not to load the environment when you dock, which is supposedly geared towards multi-boxing, is great. But why should these players be forced to choose between a low fps CQ or a black screen? But I just don't know why CCP don't keep the current ship hangar view as optional. Why not please absolutely everyone?
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.16 03:16:00 - [62] Edited by: Maul555 on 16/06/2011 03:21:08 Originally by: Oregin But I just don't know why CCP don't keep the current ship hangar view as optional. Why not please absolutely everyone? This... If I had to use one line to come to CCP with, it would be that. Thank you for putting it so simply. And when you combine that statement with the fact of how mind-blowingly simple it would be to please absolutely everyone. I just don't understand why we need to tell ccp the blindingly obvious over and over again on this topic. The EVE Personality Test
Zleon Leigh	Posted - 2011.06.16 04:28:00 - [63] Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Someone hit it on the head. I knew it had to be about more money, but I just couldn't fathom. They must be trying to go public. The only thing I'm going to be looking for is the exit sign. Incarna is nothing but a distraction. Immersion is a lie. (lol - think about that a sec..)
Geksz	Posted - 2011.06.16 07:09:00 - [64] Completely agree with the OP here. And a response or devblog about it from ccp would be nice. I've tried it on SiSi and it still loads too slow comapred to the old hangar view. And some bigger ships aren't really fit the view. And the option to not load CQ is just a Loading screen background now, wich ain't really a good solution. On the immersion side. I think the human imagination is way better than any PC hardware or animation and model detail can do. U can immerse urself in a book by just reading it, and usually u get better results with it than a movie about the book. Similarly the game can benefit from not revealing everything, and leaving stuff for ur imagination. Hell i even liked better the old graphics engine. In it's current form CQ is only beneficial for the new users, and only for a limited time. After they get used to the space side of EVE it will be a pain in the ass for them too. It doesn't add gameplay to EVE. Currently it is just a test for carbon and a showcase. With it's load time, resource needs, and clumsiness it just takes away from our EVE experience imho.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.16 09:54:00 - [65] Even if the CQ is more efficient on Sisi as opposed to Duality,That wont help gameplay and immersion concerns. And for a feature that doesn't add anything to the space side gameplay yet, I simply don't see why it should be mandatory. I'm still hoping CCP will answer the questions I put out for them. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 10:30:00 - [66] Edited by: Soden Rah on 16/06/2011 10:31:03 Originally by: Hyperforce99 Even if the CQ is more efficient on Sisi as opposed to Duality,That wont help gameplay and immersion concerns. And for a feature that doesn't add anything to the space side gameplay yet, I simply don't see why it should be mandatory. I'm still hoping CCP will answer the questions I put out for them. Yes because they have done such a good job answering Mine.... Originally by: CCP Manifest The old Hanger view, or the will CQ/Incarna be optional upon docking? We've done as much testing as possible on minspec machines, and it appears that CQ will run just fine on our current stated minspec. We did not, however, test everyone's specific Frankenstein homebrew tower, as that would literally be impossible. More on this though in an upcoming devblog. My response.... I can report that my Frankenstein home brew tower runs it fine in terms of performance, but crashes frequently in CQ. However I digress, My main points on the issue are non performance related, but are rather RP, Immersion, and design based. I Will be looking forward to the devblog with interest, I do hope it covers issues other than performance though as this is not the only, or largest, concern. Also the option not to load station environment currently solves the performance issues. The following devblog.... Silence........... __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.16 10:48:00 - [67] Yeah I have to admit, its a pretty pathetic way to beat around the bush. Its possible they have been told not to answer this question. Especially considering yesterday I saw a thread in general about "new shipwreck models" which got an instant reply by a Dev saying O GREAT IDEA. I'm getting quite disillusioned about CCPs true goals for Incarna. Especially since they came back on their promises and statements that Incarna would be an optional aspect of the game. See older Walking in Stations tech demos and the interview on it in one of the older EON magazines if you want to see for yourself. And now suddenly its to replace a core element of the game, changing several mechanics we are used to along with it. For the biggest concern people have about Incarna, CCP sure doesn't seem to be in any hurry to clear it up. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:03:00 - [68] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 16/06/2011 11:04:57 Originally by: Hyperforce99 Yeah I have to admit, its a pretty pathetic way to beat around the bush. Its possible they have been told not to answer this question. Especially considering yesterday I saw a thread in general about "new shipwreck models" which got an instant reply by a Dev saying O GREAT IDEA. I'm getting quite disillusioned about CCPs true goals for Incarna. Especially since they came back on their promises and statements that Incarna would be an optional aspect of the game. See older Walking in Stations tech demos and the interview on it in one of the older EON magazines if you want to see for yourself. And now suddenly its to replace a core element of the game, changing several mechanics we are used to along with it. For the biggest concern people have about Incarna, CCP sure doesn't seem to be in any hurry to clear it up. K, the 5-10 most notorious posters about this particular thing recognise that now. If we don't get an answer, we got some options: wait till the goo hits the fan.. this would be in 5-6 days and the following 3-4 days until every regular citizen of New Eden did had his very personal encounter with Incarna and it's usability and immersion-ess. If we're right and there are more people like us out there who like a 3d environment instead of a static splash screen, but don't like the current implementation there will be a number of threads. we make up our own answer(s) as good as possible. puts tinfoil-hat on one version I heard and which sounded quite possible is: Incarna is forced upon us, to create a permanent demand for clothing and doll-accessories, ie. AUR-shop items and won't go away. tinfoil-hat off or we keep posting the same questions over and over again and make ourself look like nerds, who got no real life Personally I got a keg and popcorn ready for next Tue/Wed. Will be fun (for once) to sit on the sideline and watch the show. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:22:00 - [69] Originally by: Zleon Leigh Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Someone hit it on the head. I knew it had to be about more money, but I just couldn't fathom. They must be trying to go public. The only thing I'm going to be looking for is the exit sign. Incarna is nothing but a distraction. Immersion is a lie. (lol - think about that a sec..) All y'all can take off your tinfoil hats.:) Forcing Incarna on everyone is really and simply the only way to make it happen. You can't do it half-way. It kinda reminds me of when the Euro was introduced here. Same story: you can't agree to make it optional and let people also still pay in their own currency, next to the Euro: you either agree to do it, or you don't. If you let people decide for themselves, they simply won't do it, as their status quo always trumps their willingness to embrace change. That's basic human nature for ya. With Incarna the problem is even bigger. Now it's only Captain's Quarters, and it's not really connected to anything else yet. Soon you'll meet each other in station, though, in a virtual market place or something, or a bar. It takes very little imagination to realize that ere long you just can't keep Incarna optional, as the whole in-station gameplay will become 3D, Incarna-style. People have responded to that, saying "Then I just won't go to a meeting!!!" Or "I won't go to a market!!" That's just being silly, though -- if, for nothing else, because others might want you at the corp meeting, for instance. In all of this I think CCP has been very reasonable. They've even offered a plan to upgrade your video card hardware, at reduced cost, to help you make the transition. The transition itself, however, is a-coming; and either CCP make it happen for everyone, or not at all. I don't see this working any other way.
Arth Lawing Gallente Penumbra Institute	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:26:00 - [70] /signed
Snake Scofield	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:29:00 - [71] /signed It's not the performance aspects of this that bother me but the gaming. Running a bunch of quick courier / tutorial missions for standing? CQ's gonna get old quick. Dock, walk to CQ, talk to agent, walk back to hanger, undock. Should be completely optional for this and immersion reasons. There's only one reason they would not make it optional when it is well within their abilities to do so. MT.
Katra Novac	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:32:00 - [72] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Zleon Leigh Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Someone hit it on the head. I knew it had to be about more money, but I just couldn't fathom. They must be trying to go public. The only thing I'm going to be looking for is the exit sign. Incarna is nothing but a distraction. Immersion is a lie. (lol - think about that a sec..) All y'all can take off your tinfoil hats.:) Forcing Incarna on everyone is really and simply the only way to make it happen. You can't do it half-way. It kinda reminds me of when the Euro was introduced here. Same story: you can't agree to make it optional and let people also still pay in their own currency, next to the Euro: you either agree to do it, or you don't. If you let people decide for themselves, they simply won't do it, as their status quo always trumps their willingness to embrace change. That's basic human nature for ya. With Incarna the problem is even bigger. Now it's only Captain's Quarters, and it's not really connected to anything else yet. Soon you'll meet each other in station, though, in a virtual market place or something, or a bar. It takes very little imagination to realize that ere long you just can't keep Incarna optional, as the whole in-station gameplay will become 3D, Incarna-style. People have responded to that, saying "Then I just won't go to a meeting!!!" Or "I won't go to a market!!" That's just being silly, though -- if, for nothing else, because others might want you at the corp meeting, for instance. In all of this I think CCP has been very reasonable. They've even offered a plan to upgrade your video card hardware, at reduced cost, to help you make the transition. The transition itself, however, is a-coming; and either CCP make it happen for everyone, or not at all. I don't see this working any other way. You can't compare the introduction of the Euro to Incarna, they are not even remotely similar. It's a choice CCP have made but as it stands it's a poor choice. It won't effect me much as I no longer run multiple accounts but I can understand the concern of others. Especially as CCP have had a policy to promote multiple accounts, so they should bear some of the responsibility to those players that do have multiple accounts. I can't see why they can't have the old hanger as an option. They could also advertise deals for items in the shop on the login screen like some other MMOs do.
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:36:00 - [73] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Zleon Leigh Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Someone hit it on the head. I knew it had to be about more money, but I just couldn't fathom. They must be trying to go public. The only thing I'm going to be looking for is the exit sign. Incarna is nothing but a distraction. Immersion is a lie. (lol - think about that a sec..) All y'all can take off your tinfoil hats.:) Forcing Incarna on everyone is really and simply the only way to make it happen. You can't do it half-way. It kinda reminds me of when the Euro was introduced here. Same story: you can't agree to make it optional and let people also still pay in their own currency, next to the Euro: you either agree to do it, or you don't. If you let people decide for themselves, they simply won't do it, as their status quo always trumps their willingness to embrace change. That's basic human nature for ya. With Incarna the problem is even bigger. Now it's only Captain's Quarters, and it's not really connected to anything else yet. Soon you'll meet each other in station, though, in a virtual market place or something, or a bar. It takes very little imagination to realize that ere long you just can't keep Incarna optional, as the whole in-station gameplay will become 3D, Incarna-style. People have responded to that, saying "Then I just won't go to a meeting!!!" Or "I won't go to a market!!" That's just being silly, though -- if, for nothing else, because others might want you at the corp meeting, for instance. In all of this I think CCP has been very reasonable. They've even offered a plan to upgrade your video card hardware, at reduced cost, to help you make the transition. The transition itself, however, is a-coming; and either CCP make it happen for everyone, or not at all. I don't see this working any other way. First up... the comparison to the Euro is wrong, they are nothing alike and thus can't be compared. (also the Euro was a bloody stupid idea, which is why its really great we didn't join it, UK here) There is absolutely no reason why Incarna would fail, if you entered it via a button on the station neocom in the old hanger view. In fact as I have said you get much more design options and flexibility if you don't try to tie the two together. (as I explained here) If Incarna has good content (in later expansions, I am fine with staggered release) then people will use it. If it doesn't people wont use and making people load into CQ wont change that. Arguing otherwise is moronic. __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:38:00 - [74] Originally by: Ranka Mei snip All y'all can take off your tinfoil hats.:) Forcing Incarna on everyone is really and simply the only way to make it happen. You can't do it half-way. It kinda reminds me of when the Euro was introduced here. Same story: you can't agree to make it optional and let people also still pay in their own currency, next to the Euro: you either agree to do it, or you don't. If you let people decide for themselves, they simply won't do it, as their status quo always trumps their willingness to embrace change. That's basic human nature for ya. And see what happened with that forced thing.. personally I give it 10 more years until the first country has to leave the common currency. But enough off-topic, I can follow your argument about change and people. Know where that comes from? It's experience - never change a running system. And in 5 days we'll see how this will go down. Originally by: Ranka Mei With Incarna the problem is even bigger. Now it's only Captain's Quarters, and it's not really connected to anything else yet. Soon you'll meet each other in station, though, in a virtual market place or something, or a bar. It takes very little imagination to realize that ere long you just can't keep Incarna optional, as the whole in-station gameplay will become 3D, Incarna-style. People have responded to that, saying "Then I just won't go to a meeting!!!" Or "I won't go to a market!!" That's just being silly, though -- if, for nothing else, because others might want you at the corp meeting, for instance. That's BS and you know that. I look forward to Incarna as you, but I'm not so mad to think that everyone should have to load it to play the space-flight-part of Eve Online. To top this CCP themself said Incarna would not be needed to do anything you can do right now.. this includes market, fitting, agents, etc pp. So if you just want to fly your spaceship, Incarna shouldn't interfere with that. Thing is, it's interfering.. usability and immersion wise Incarna is causing trouble. If CCP adds gameplay that's not possible yet in Eve, like boosters or minigames or dressup or corpmeetings, all fine and dandy. That would be an incentive to use Incarna.. but that isn't there yet, so forcing this onto people who don't want to get the usability of shiphangar or their immersion shattered is not the way to go. Originally by: Ranka Mei In all of this I think CCP has been very reasonable. They've even offered a plan to upgrade your video card hardware, at reduced cost, to help you make the transition. The transition itself, however, is a-coming; and either CCP make it happen for everyone, or not at all. I don't see this working any other way. CQ tries to be the hangar docking version and Incarna at the same time and can't fulfil both roles. I'll be sitting on my couch and watch the forums burn.. there are enough Missionrunners, PVPers and Miners out there, that will be seriously upset about the decreased usability that the current CQ is. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:42:00 - [75] Originally by: Tres Farmer And see what happened with that forced thing.. personally I give it 10 more years until the first country has to leave the common currency. This is off topic, and we are not in the Euro zone... but I give it a lot less than that before the UK leaves Europe altogether... We might stay in the common market, which is what we originally signed up for... __________________________________________________ Originally by: CCP Tuxford bugger, I need to have a closer look at this menu function
Othran Brutor Tribe	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:50:00 - [76] If I'm forced to go through CQ again and again and again and.. you get it - every time I want to change a ship then I can see it annoying me enough that I'd want to play less. To me its like a repetitive cut scene that you can't disable or skip. We've all seen them in other games, nice the first few times, annoying after 15-20 times, going postal after 50+ Their game and they can do what they want with it. Seems to be some very bad decisions being made though, and its obvious they all revolve around increasing ARPU. Oh well we'll see how that pans out for CCP.....
Koronakesh Amarr Seekers of a Silent Paradise	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:55:00 - [77] I've never forgiven you for taking away my automatic ship spinning option, please don't take the rest away now
Zervun Amarr hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.06.16 11:56:00 - [78] Signed. The hangar view needs to be an option.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.16 15:46:00 - [79] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 16/06/2011 15:46:18 Off Topic: Personally I like the Euro, but yeah the current mismanagement is not leading it any place good. /Off Topic. If CCP wants CQ to be used often they should ensure it had useful and usable features. Forcing it isn't going to tell CCP if they are doing a good job. I foresee that if the CQ is going to really replace the current hangar view, in a month or 2 many players will simply stand still on the hangar balcony and use the Neo-Com to navigate... --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.06.16 15:48:00 - [80] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 16/06/2011 15:46:18 Off Topic: Personally I like the Euro, but yeah the current mismanagement is not leading it any place good. /Off Topic. If CCP wants CQ to be used often they should ensure it had useful and usable features. Forcing it isn't going to tell CCP if they are doing a good job. I foresee that if the CQ is going to really replace the current hangar view, in a month or 2 many players will simply stand still on the hangar balcony and use the Neo-Com to navigate... Or not waste the system resources and don't bother loading the station environment at all. ------------------------------------------- Originally by: Kronus Heilgar You are charging people who work for free to make your game better you asshats
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.16 16:58:00 - [81] Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Zleon Leigh Originally by: Razin Yeah, I'd also like to hear something concrete and unambiguous (!) from CCP on this subject. Near as I can tell the current compulsory nature of CQ/Incarna content comes from a business requirement to maximize exposure to MT merchandise. I.e. the more-longer you are forced to stare at your avatar (and other avatars in some future), the more likely you are to spend some Aurum. Someone hit it on the head. I knew it had to be about more money, but I just couldn't fathom. They must be trying to go public. The only thing I'm going to be looking for is the exit sign. Incarna is nothing but a distraction. Immersion is a lie. (lol - think about that a sec..) All y'all can take off your tinfoil hats.:) Forcing Incarna on everyone is really and simply the only way to make it happen. You can't do it half-way. It kinda reminds me of when the Euro was introduced here. Same story: you can't agree to make it optional and let people also still pay in their own currency, next to the Euro: you either agree to do it, or you don't. If you let people decide for themselves, they simply won't do it, as their status quo always trumps their willingness to embrace change. That's basic human nature for ya. With Incarna the problem is even bigger. Now it's only Captain's Quarters, and it's not really connected to anything else yet. Soon you'll meet each other in station, though, in a virtual market place or something, or a bar. It takes very little imagination to realize that ere long you just can't keep Incarna optional, as the whole in-station gameplay will become 3D, Incarna-style. People have responded to that, saying "Then I just won't go to a meeting!!!" Or "I won't go to a market!!" That's just being silly, though -- if, for nothing else, because others might want you at the corp meeting, for instance. In all of this I think CCP has been very reasonable. They've even offered a plan to upgrade your video card hardware, at reduced cost, to help you make the transition. The transition itself, however, is a-coming; and either CCP make it happen for everyone, or not at all. I don't see this working any other way. You are confused (and possibly deranged, reading some of your arguments). 0.0 alliances politics are a major part of the game, but are entirely optional. You may be affected by them. The market may fluctuate due to some large scale 0.0 events. Or you may get stuck in a camped system in the middle of an inter-alliance war zone. However you are never forced to participate. And that is RIGHT. Incarna can and needs to be the same. Optional. With a spin-ship hangar when you really don't want to participate. ... If you like choice please support this topic in the Assembly Hall. Thanks.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.16 17:05:00 - [82] Originally by: Ranka Mei snip I don't see this working.. snap Me too, me too.. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Castricide	Posted - 2011.06.16 17:16:00 - [83] Originally by: Snake Scofield /signed It's not the performance aspects of this that bother me but the gaming. Running a bunch of quick courier / tutorial missions for standing? CQ's gonna get old quick. Dock, walk to CQ, talk to agent, walk back to hanger, undock. Should be completely optional for this and immersion reasons. There's only one reason they would not make it optional when it is well within their abilities to do so. MT. Exactly what I am worried about. My computer can run it fine, so I'm not worried about that. But what about when I need to get to a station, switch ships fast, and run out to help a corp buddy from getting podded by the griefer corp that just wardecced us? I really don't think sitting through a loading screen and/or animation is going to help.
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.06.16 17:28:00 - [84] What CCP is failing to realize is the critical correlation to women and relationships this whole CQ thing has. You see... it's pretty simple. Let's put it this way... Sometimes we want the whole process to take time. We want the wining and dining, the exploration as we get the feel for the whole package. There are places we'll want to go down to and see first hand, so to speak, and really get the flavor of. Maybe we'll want to get a few drinks, have a bite to eat, etc. Sometimes, however, we simply want to jam our ship into the hangar, drop our load and go. Don't take away our quickies...
Lonehawk	Posted - 2011.06.16 18:13:00 - [85] There's an old saying: "You can please some of the people some of the time; You can even please all of the people some of the time; But you can't please all of the people all of the time." I agree with those who have posted (and there are MANY) the idea of a button above the Undock button to enter CQ thereby making it optional for those who want to go there and easy for those who don't. This would please everybody. Having the above cliche'd saying in mind, what kind of company would be so idiotic as to NOT take the opportunity to be able to do something that is normally a cliche'd impossibility? Eg. Pleasing everybody. This to me shows that CCP's attitude is (also posted by MANY) no longer in line with concern about the player base but more in line with "It's our way or the highway suckers." It will be interesting to see how many eventually say, "Enough of this." and chose the highway to other avenues.
Sahara	Posted - 2011.06.16 20:38:00 - [86] This seriously needs a CCP dev response.
RensPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.06.16 20:44:00 - [87] Edited by: RensPriceChecker2 on 16/06/2011 20:46:06 guys you need to understand how proud ccp is about incarna. finally after ~5years in development by the most brilliant developers you now have a game where the player can walk inside a room ! off course they dont want to make this optional. they wanna make sure EVERY player experiences this new technologic milestone in pc gaming and applaude them for producing this with less then a 500000000.00 USD budget. also its great because the microtransactions that we all love so much and had been begging ccp to implement come with it for "free" !
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2011.06.16 20:51:00 - [88] Originally by: Sahara This seriously needs a CCP dev response. Which will likely consist of "Look, shiny pants, you can buy shiny pants! You don't like shiny pants? Whiner!" All from an alt of course. Oops, bag, cat, come back here!
Nyla Skin Unknown Soldiers Soldiers Of New Eve	Posted - 2011.06.16 21:50:00 - [89] Originally by: Snake Scofield Im just gonna dock quickly to change ammo/hardeners. Doh. The docking/loading times arent actually increased by the new enviroment.
Mister Smithington	Posted - 2011.06.16 21:51:00 - [90] /signed Give people a reason to use incarna and they will do so gladly and willingly. Force them to use it and they'll be bitter.
Arya Greywolf	Posted - 2011.06.16 22:40:00 - [91] I agree with this. For everyone *****ing at OP because his computer isn't amazing or whatever, you're missing a major point of the post. From a design standpoint, why not give your customer the option, instead of pigeonholing them into an undesirable situation? It's especially pertinent when you're talking about multiple clients. Yeah, one CQ loading screen is fine, but add another or 2 more and you're killing your system. CCP, please listen and give us the option!
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.17 01:34:00 - [92] Bumping for the hope of a dev response... The EVE Personality Test
Rhadia	Posted - 2011.06.17 01:48:00 - [93] Their forcing it on us because they're blatantly trying to make it seem like this expansion isn't as content-lacking as really is. Not really working.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.17 04:13:00 - [94] 4 days to go. I wonder how many people are used to doubleclicking their ship in hangar for opening the cargo bay. We'll find out I guess. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Constantinus Maximus Paxian Expeditionary Force	Posted - 2011.06.17 04:20:00 - [95] Originally by: Rhadia Their forcing it on us because they're blatantly trying to make it seem like this expansion isn't as content-lacking as really is. Not really working. Is funny eh. * "We won't be working on eve for 18 months" * Rabble Rabble Rabble! * "Ok we'll put a team or 2 on stuff that 'looks' like progress" * Yay I love barbie! * Um... This is just filler crap. * "But we're so amazingly dedicated to developing EveOnline, WoD, DUST, It's all Eve!" * CCP, you suck. * "New Release: Shorts and shirts!" * WTF CCP?!? * "Hey you can buy ships for $$$ now!! We're awesome" * OMFG CCP YOU DUMB ****S!!! They've given up, you as customers are just fodder now for them to chew up while they work on projects they imagine have more of a future. CCP are so very afraid that EveOnline is not up to standard and based on a broken foundation, making it near impossible to compete over the next 10 years.
Benri Konpaku	Posted - 2011.06.17 04:40:00 - [96] Because of Nvidia bribes and Aurum.
Tapdancing Batman	Posted - 2011.06.17 08:30:00 - [97] Originally by: Tres Farmer 4 days to go. I wonder how many people are used to doubleclicking their ship in hangar for opening the cargo bay. We'll find out I guess. Oh damn, I always do that.
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.17 08:38:00 - [98] Originally by: Tres Farmer But enough off-topic, I can follow your argument about change and people. Know where that comes from? It's experience - never change a running system. With that kind of reasoning, no change would ever be made. Besides, in their latest interview blog, CCP already explained that EVE is a running system; that they cannot take it off-line half-a-year, just to go implement new stuff; so they make relatively small installments, each to test out the functionality of one particular thing. In this case, only CQ, and nothing more yet. The irony is, that their prudency is then translated to 'no real extra content.' Sigh. Quote: If CCP adds gameplay that's not possible yet in Eve, like boosters or minigames or dressup or corpmeetings, all fine and dandy. That would be an incentive to use Incarna.. but that isn't there yet, so forcing this onto people who don't want to get the usability of shiphangar or their immersion shattered is not the way to go. Which is precisely why CCP said the button to make it optional would remain for a while: because as long as CQ does not really connect to a larger portion of Incarna yet, needed for overall gameplay, they can indeed afford to leave the choice to use it to the players. Quote: Thing is, it's interfering.. usability and immersion wise Incarna is causing trouble. The immersion argument, having to decant each time and all, is grossly exaggerated. And the extra immersion you get from having a whole new, real-like 3D world added, vastly overshadows the somewhat nitpicky decant immersion issue. --
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.06.17 08:41:00 - [99] Originally by: Ranka Mei The immersion argument, having to decant each time and all, is grossly exaggerated. The devil is in the details, and we all have a one way ticket to hell. On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________ Huh?
San Severina Minmatar Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.17 08:52:00 - [100] + Me.. Posting for Dev response, seems reasonable this close to launch. CQ is not practical for all the time use, any idiot that plays EvE can see that. Do Devs play this game at all?
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.17 09:10:00 - [101] Originally by: Ranka Mei The immersion argument, having to decant each time and all, is grossly exaggerated. And the extra immersion you get from having a whole new, real-like 3D world added, vastly overshadows the somewhat nitpicky decant immersion issue. If this bares any resemblance to the logic that CCP is using behind closed doors, then it explains a lot. Its not a trivial issue. Its a core issue. This is supposed to be the ultimate immersive sci-fi simulator. And a major expansion that is supposed to increase immersion is breaking it. If you cant see that, then you have your head up your but. It makes no sense to leave the pod on every dock. The EVE Personality Test
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2011.06.17 09:29:00 - [102] My guess to why CCP defaults you to captain quarters instead of the current hangar view is because they consider it bad game design to make a strict separation between the space game and Incarna. Even though it is this strict separation (or wall) the people here keep asking for. In some regard I can understand why; having a major part of the game "hidden" is generally not a good design. In fact, it seems like CQ will be used as an opportunity to advertise some other less known game features (such as pirate epic arcs) making these more assessable for players and further diminish the separation between the space game and Incarna. Still, I too find it hugely immersion breaking that a pod pilot exits his pod every time he docks for a few seconds to recharge his capacitor and shields. -- Mr. Science & Trade Institute - EVE Lorebook - Mysteries of W-space
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.17 09:38:00 - [103] Originally by: Jowen Datloran Still, I too find it hugely immersion breaking that a pod pilot exits his pod every time he docks for a few seconds to recharge his capacitor and shields. Having to decant each time remains a very minor issue to me. Far worse than that, is finding myself in a duct-taped held together Minmatar CQ inside a Caldari station! Now, that breaks immersion. And all because CCP couldn't really finish Incarna 1.0 on time come June 21. --
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:03:00 - [104] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 17/06/2011 11:06:11 Originally by: Ranka Mei snip Quote: Thing is, it's interfering.. usability and immersion wise Incarna is causing trouble. The immersion argument, having to decant each time and all, is grossly exaggerated. And the extra immersion you get from having a whole new, real-like 3D world added, vastly overshadows the somewhat nitpicky decant immersion issue. By that logic everyone would have a planetary interaction window open as soon as he's in range of a planet.. Look Ranka, I like Incarna, but I don't want it every friggen time I dock. Why is that so hard to accept for you? Do I force PI or FW or POS or SOV or W-Space onto you? Do I suggest that every ship that's warping through a solar system should be sucked into a wormhole from time to time, cause that is content that shouldn't be ignored? Or do I suggest that every system in new eden should be sieged for one day a week by the opposing faction so that everybody can have a part in Factional Warfare? Do I suggest that every NPC manufacturing, ME/PE/Copy/Invention slots gets removed, so that everyone has to deal with POS and this huge part of the game? Do you see me talking like that? You project yourself onto others and don't respect other peoples playstyles. If Incarna has got incentives to use it, people will use it. If Incarna has no incentives, but on top some drawbacks overthe current status quo, people will hate it. Originally by: Ranka Mei Originally by: Jowen Datloran Still, I too find it hugely immersion breaking that a pod pilot exits his pod every time he docks for a few seconds to recharge his capacitor and shields. Having to decant each time remains a very minor issue to me. Far worse than that, is finding myself in a duct-taped held together Minmatar CQ inside a Caldari station! Now, that breaks immersion. And all because CCP couldn't really finish Incarna 1.0 on time come June 21. You don't like Minma CQ in Caldari Stations? - I couldn't care less as the others will come somewhat later.. so much about opinions and tastes. I'm out and waiting for the thread-noughts come the 21st. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Rina Jenette	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:17:00 - [105] Originally by: RensPriceChecker2 guys you need to understand how proud ccp is about incarna. finally after ~5years in development by the most brilliant developers you now have a game where the player can walk inside a room ! Well to be fair they should be proud of incarna, from what I've seen it's graphical beyond any mmo out there. That said however, and as much as I am looking forward to it, I have to agree with the general consensus that the existing setup should be an option, whether it's a checkbox in settings or a button to disembark out of the normal screen into the CQ. For those who want to got to the CQ frequently, of which I expect I will be one, clicking a button in the existing docking screen to do so is a very minor thing. Ideally they could put a button in both the regular dock and the CQ and have a checkbox in settings for the default docking style you want (and then hit the button in the dock/cq to swap between).
Ranka Mei Caldari	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:27:00 - [106] Originally by: Tres Farmer Look Ranka, I like Incarna, but I don't want it every friggen time I dock. Why is that so hard to accept for you? Do I force PI or FW or POS or SOV or W-Space onto you? Do I suggest that every ship that's warping through a solar system should be sucked into a wormhole from time to time, cause that is content that shouldn't be ignored? Or do I suggest that every system in new eden should be sieged for one day a week by the opposing faction so that everybody can have a part in Factional Warfare? Do I suggest that every NPC manufacturing, ME/PE/Copy/Invention slots gets removed, so that everyone has to deal with POS and this huge part of the game? Do you see me talking like that? There's choices and choices. All of the above are just about a certain way of gameplay. Gates, planets, moons, stations, etc., these are part of a fixed infrastructure. And I don't think the latter should be optional, no. There's something to be said for not having to find yourself in quarters each time, though, when all you want to do is grab a few more missiles. Also, the novelty of CQ wears off pretty fast, as I found out soon enough after spending some time on the test server. So, maybe a 'docking for maintenance/resupply only' mode could come in handy. Eventually, it's more the larger issue that concerns me. There was this guy here, on this forum, saying he'd go live out of his Orca, just to avoid having to deal with Incarna. And that's his prerogative, of course. Ultimately, trying to avoid and/or asking for ways to avoid major parts of the game infrastructure will be self-defeating, though, from a game design perspective. And I can see how CCP doesn't want to give in to that. Quote: You don't like Minma CQ in Caldari Stations? - I couldn't care less as the others will come somewhat later.. so much about opinions and tastes. Well, CCP's track record of finishing up on expansions they started earlier is less than stellar. So, I hope we really do get race-specific quarters later on. --
Haramir Haleths Caldari Nutella Bande	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:30:00 - [107] Quit simple. They wont maintain 2 Interfaces for future changes. That is more cost extensiv then just 1 interface. Work around for Ship Hoppers and Immersion Guys would be an additional popup window during the docking process. Do you want to exit your POD or just change your Ship. Case 1 you will be docked and transported into Captains Quarter. Case 2 another selection Dialog popup where you can select your ship and afterwards you will be back in space in the new ship immediatly.
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:39:00 - [108] To anyone saying that EVE needs to evolve and move on graphically and all that. Just remember that the Hanger uses the same space engine as the space part of the game.... so if the space part gets upgraded, so would the hanger. I'm sure the work required for such a feat of graphical awesomeness is well within the capability of CCP's programming prowess. I don't think we are going to get the option to have both, which would create a better and more fulfilling game for everyone and encourage more subs and money for CCP. We are going to get just the CQ. I believe the reason for this is because they want us to spend more money on the game than we do already. This is then game design, not for improving the experience of the game, but for conditioning players to spend money through MT. Whilst I'm not thinking about quitting EVE altogether just yet, I'm becoming disillusioned with the company and the prospects of the games future. It's making me look elsewhere for alternatives, when for many years now I would never have thought about it. I'm just disappointed.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.06.17 11:45:00 - [109] Originally by: Haramir Haleths Quit simple. They wont maintain 2 Interfaces for future changes. That is more cost extensiv then just 1 interface. àexcept that it isn't two interfaces ù it's one interface reached through two different means. It doesn't matter if you just click the button on your neocom or if you walk up to your trading/fitting/industry terminal in Incarna ù the same market/fitting/industry window will appear. Unless they suddenly want to remove all remote capabilities from people sitting in their ships, those windows will always be around, and they will not duplicate them by creating some odd incarna-specific variants. This whole issue is not about creating two interfaces. It's about having one environment and the choice not to use it, but still have access to the same interface (of which there will still only be one). If it is a huge effort for them not to do something, or if not doing something creates bugs, they really need to fire their developers. 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
Sucateira	Posted - 2011.06.17 12:22:00 - [110] I guess that having multiple accounts and play all of them at the same time don't break your immersion. I also can't see why people feel conditioned into MT. Saying that its so ridiculous that invalidate any decent post. Why are you guys using super uber high tech ships and think its weird someone leaving its pod and enter the CQ. btw... can I have your stuff?
DraconisAlpha	Posted - 2011.06.17 12:39:00 - [111] /signed I DONT ****IN CARE ABOUT DAMN INCARNA
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 12:54:00 - [112] Originally by: Sucateira I also can't see why people feel conditioned into MT. Saying that its so ridiculous that invalidate any decent post. It's the same theory behind how shops and supermarkets setup their floors to encourage people to buy certain products. If you don't understand that you must be a victim often.
Mary Jane Insane	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:02:00 - [113] Originally by: Hannibal Ord Originally by: Sucateira I also can't see why people feel conditioned into MT. Saying that its so ridiculous that invalidate any decent post. It's the same theory behind how shops and supermarkets setup their floors to encourage people to buy certain products. If you don't understand that you must be a victim often. No dude... people that feel tempted and conditioned by it.. are the victims. CCP can block my entire screen with MT stuff that I wont buy it. So I don't see in what should i feel conditioned for.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:02:00 - [114] Edited by: Tres Farmer on 17/06/2011 13:04:35 Originally by: Ranka Mei snip Eventually, it's more the larger issue that concerns me. There was this guy here, on this forum, saying he'd go live out of his Orca, just to avoid having to deal with Incarna. And that's his prerogative, of course. Ultimately, trying to avoid and/or asking for ways to avoid major parts of the game infrastructure will be self-defeating, though, from a game design perspective. And I can see how CCP doesn't want to give in to that. LOL, there is a whole race out there doing exactly that. They're called Thukkers. They roam the stars and don't settle. And again, it's his game, his playstyle. If he doesn't want to set a foot onto a station it's HIS PERSONAL decision. I thought we got a sandbox here, not a freaking we-push-it-down-your-throat-themepark? Originally by: Ranka Mei Quote: You don't like Minma CQ in Caldari Stations? - I couldn't care less as the others will come somewhat later.. so much about opinions and tastes. Well, CCP's track record of finishing up on expansions they started earlier is less than stellar. So, I hope we really do get race-specific quarters later on. And that's why you my little dear will wait another 4 years for the rest of the features that have been promised with Incarna. I'm already over that stage of blind and hopeful thinking with CCP. And exactly that's why I don't like them removing the current hangar in a haste and having it replaced with something that isn't according to the lore and less useful for our day to day needs. Because we'll have to live with this for at least a year until something happens to it's usability. CCP does that all the time. I rather have a functional hangar all the time and Incarna when I want to enjoy it, then Incarna all the time with it's problems. I was just on Sisi again to test the rclicking on a ship in the hangar to get it's cargo open.. sometimes it worked, sometimes not. Then it stopped working. I could stand on the couch too, still. I could jump onto the couch from behind. But I can't command my char to sit on it from further away, although the context menu is accessible. And the walker is completely capable to make it's way around furniture alone, so that's not an excuse. Lighting still sucks, even on highest settings. There will be many people who just want to relax and play the game and not fight a cumbersome 3D UI that is still bug ridden. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:11:00 - [115] Originally by: Mary Jane Insane Originally by: Hannibal Ord Originally by: Sucateira I also can't see why people feel conditioned into MT. Saying that its so ridiculous that invalidate any decent post. It's the same theory behind how shops and supermarkets setup their floors to encourage people to buy certain products. If you don't understand that you must be a victim often. No dude... people that feel tempted and conditioned by it.. are the victims. CCP can block my entire screen with MT stuff that I wont buy it. So I don't see in what should i feel conditioned for. That is correct. But from a design perspective if you plonk the product in front of the buyer for long enough people will do it. Because there has been no dev response to any of this issue, they can't give any good reason why the hanger view and CQ shouldn't be options which a player can switch between at will. If there is no technical reason (which I doubt there would be) then there has to be a design reason behind it. If there is no logical reason why the design wouldn't benefit being from having the dual system..on all levels, then I can only assume that it's been done for other reasons. No dev is responding, at any point, the hundreds of times this has been brought up. But they have been responding to much lesser questions, which means they are reading the post and do not want to comment on the matter. At this moment in time, the only reason I see is that it increases the time exposed to the AVATAR itself and the MT store. Time exposed is like advertising, and whether you realise it or not it has an effect on our purchasing habits. As well as this, for many people (not me) it is increasing the hardware requirements, forcing people to upgrade their graphics cards (nvidia deal). So at the end of the day this CQ implementation (and I'm pro CQ) is not being designed for enhancing the game.
caldar ian Final Destination.	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:18:00 - [116] Agree with the o/p This is the beginning of the end for eve. I cant even be bothered to say any more, no one is listening to eve players.
Sucateira	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:40:00 - [117] Originally by: Hannibal Ord Originally by: Mary Jane Insane Originally by: Hannibal Ord Originally by: Sucateira I also can't see why people feel conditioned into MT. Saying that its so ridiculous that invalidate any decent post. It's the same theory behind how shops and supermarkets setup their floors to encourage people to buy certain products. If you don't understand that you must be a victim often. No dude... people that feel tempted and conditioned by it.. are the victims. CCP can block my entire screen with MT stuff that I wont buy it. So I don't see in what should i feel conditioned for. That is correct. But from a design perspective if you plonk the product in front of the buyer for long enough people will do it. Because there has been no dev response to any of this issue, they can't give any good reason why the hanger view and CQ shouldn't be options which a player can switch between at will. If there is no technical reason (which I doubt there would be) then there has to be a design reason behind it. If there is no logical reason why the design wouldn't benefit being from having the dual system..on all levels, then I can only assume that it's been done for other reasons. No dev is responding, at any point, the hundreds of times this has been brought up. But they have been responding to much lesser questions, which means they are reading the post and do not want to comment on the matter. At this moment in time, the only reason I see is that it increases the time exposed to the AVATAR itself and the MT store. Time exposed is like advertising, and whether you realise it or not it has an effect on our purchasing habits. As well as this, for many people (not me) it is increasing the hardware requirements, forcing people to upgrade their graphics cards (nvidia deal). So at the end of the day this CQ implementation (and I'm pro CQ) is not being designed for enhancing the game. You have a valid point. But myself I'm not a victim to publicity that easy. I also don't fall in the same lame practice of having more than one character to make my eve life easier. And that is much more game breaking and lame than any MT on my face all day. I also don't buy computers to play. I buy them to work and study. If I can't play EVE on my machine after this expansion I'll just have to unsubscribe. That's how I work ehehe No MT's, no gaming rigs. This is casual to me and not a priority at all. ...sorry for the sucky unglish
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:47:00 - [118] Quote: I also don't buy computers to play. I buy them to work and study. If I can't play EVE on my machine after this expansion I'll just have to unsubscribe. That's how I work ehehe No MT's, no gaming rigs. This is casual to me and not a priority at all. So why are you even playing devil's advocate then? Or do you just play devil's advocate as a casual thing and not a priority at all? On the other hand has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? ________________________________________________ Huh?
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 13:56:00 - [119] Edited by: Hannibal Ord on 17/06/2011 13:59:06 You have a valid point. But myself I'm not a victim to publicity that easy. I also don't fall in the same lame practice of having more than one character to make my eve life easier. And that is much more game breaking and lame than any MT on my face all day. I also don't buy computers to play. I buy them to work and study. If I can't play EVE on my machine after this expansion I'll just have to unsubscribe. That's how I work ehehe No MT's, no gaming rigs. This is casual to me and not a priority at all. ...sorry for the sucky unglish I just like the game and I want the game designed and improved so it is more fun, more usable with more features. I don't want it designed so people are encouraged subliminally to spend more RL money at the expense of the former points for improving the game. I don't mind MT or increased hardware requirements. When the game is being designed for the purpose of advertising and not actual game play, then for me, it's time to stop playing. Especially if the design impedes current game play usage. Because it means the developers no longer want it improved for the gamers who pay and play it.
Mary Jane Insane	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:08:00 - [120] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Quote: I also don't buy computers to play. I buy them to work and study. If I can't play EVE on my machine after this expansion I'll just have to unsubscribe. That's how I work ehehe No MT's, no gaming rigs. This is casual to me and not a priority at all. So why are you even playing devil's advocate then? Or do you just play devil's advocate as a casual thing and not a priority at all? Well... i give the benefit of doubt (if i can translate from my language to this). Maybe they just want people to use the mechanics they are working for...for so long I guess.
Mary Jane Insane	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:14:00 - [121] Edited by: Mary Jane Insane on 17/06/2011 14:14:06 Maybe they should use the same Carbon tech to remake the dock and give you guys both options then. Or maybe better... beeing able to change ship wihtout docking but making some nasty carbon animation with the ship transition. I just find silly to keep old tech and new tech all together. Dunno... Anyway... there's lot more gaming breaking and imersion breaking stuff atm. Like, start paying isk for each local chat line people write. Maybe it would not break my imersion from sily spam. And theres plenty of more, but I'm so casual that I cba to list. :))
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:25:00 - [122] Originally by: Mary Jane Insane Edited by: Mary Jane Insane on 17/06/2011 14:14:06 Maybe they should use the same Carbon tech to remake the dock and give you guys both options then. Or maybe better... beeing able to change ship wihtout docking but making some nasty carbon animation with the ship transition. I just find silly to keep old tech and new tech all together. Dunno... Anyway... there's lot more gaming breaking and imersion breaking stuff atm. Like, start paying isk for each local chat line people write. Maybe it would not break my imersion from sily spam. And theres plenty of more, but I'm so casual that I cba to list. :)) As far as I'm aware, the carbon tech refers to the way the code is integrated into the rest of eve, not the actual graphics engine itself. So the Incarna engine for CQ, and the spaceship graphics all come under CARBON. And from the CQ if you turn around the spaceship sitting above the balcony looks exactly the same as the ship spinny one in the hanger anyway. And what is this isk thing you are talking about with local chat? Are you referring to CSPA charge?
Mary Jane Insane	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:37:00 - [123] Originally by: Hannibal Ord Originally by: Mary Jane Insane Edited by: Mary Jane Insane on 17/06/2011 14:14:06 Maybe they should use the same Carbon tech to remake the dock and give you guys both options then. Or maybe better... beeing able to change ship wihtout docking but making some nasty carbon animation with the ship transition. I just find silly to keep old tech and new tech all together. Dunno... Anyway... there's lot more gaming breaking and imersion breaking stuff atm. Like, start paying isk for each local chat line people write. Maybe it would not break my imersion from sily spam. And theres plenty of more, but I'm so casual that I cba to list. :)) As far as I'm aware, the carbon tech refers to the way the code is integrated into the rest of eve, not the actual graphics engine itself. So the Incarna engine for CQ, and the spaceship graphics all come under CARBON. And from the CQ if you turn around the spaceship sitting above the balcony looks exactly the same as the ship spinny one in the hanger anyway. And what is this isk thing you are talking about with local chat? Are you referring to CSPA charge? I'm talking about different game breaking stuff that exist already. Like useless, childish local chat spam. I was proposing a isk charge for each line of text people write in there :) Anyway.. since I'm casual, maybe I can't see the problem at same dimension as you guys. Maybe i'm arguing more about immersion than gameplay. But ofc... delicate issues for delicate (or not) different people.. with different tastes and experiences. I just don't think this change its all about CCP promoting MT... shrug, maybe it is. Someone propose an outside station change ship thing. with the fancy animation they seem to like. :))
Miilla Minmatar Hulkageddon Orphanage	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:39:00 - [124] Originally by: Adunh Slavy You are forced to the CQ so you can see ... "Special, Today Only, Quaffe Pants! 3 Aurum, get em while supplies last!" You need a later shader model because all pants in Incarna are US sizes, needs more polygons
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:41:00 - [125] Originally by: Miilla Originally by: Adunh Slavy You are forced to the CQ so you can see ... "Special, Today Only, Quaffe Pants! 3 Aurum, get em while supplies last!" You need a later shader model because all pants in Incarna are US sizes, needs more polygons I read that as NEED MORE PYLONS!
Protokill Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2011.06.17 14:56:00 - [126] Glad I have an awesome computer! Can't wait for this update!
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.17 16:41:00 - [127] Originally by: Protokill Glad I have an awesome computer! Can't wait for this update! Too bad the content is just like 20x40m2 and mixes up the former ship hangar view with the new Incarna view. Once you've seen it for some hours you wonder why you'd been so exited about it. And after you used it for some days you'll recognise the quirks and I think you'd want some functionality of the old ship hangar view back.. we'll see. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
XIRUSPHERE Gallente The 8th Order	Posted - 2011.06.17 17:02:00 - [128] Edited by: XIRUSPHERE on 17/06/2011 17:05:25 The answer is painfully simple and CCP will not make any light on this question specifically because of it. It's the same reason paired items are spread out across a super market. CCP is going to shove the CQ down your throat, you are going to have to be exposed to it every single time you enter the station environment in the hopes that the more you are saturated by this empty content the more likely you are to break a plex and play barbie. CCP does not care about what you want, or what people who play this game for pvp want. They care about making a buck off forcing crap down our collective gullets. I dare any mod to make a statement to the contrary that carries any truth.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.17 17:14:00 - [129] Originally by: Jowen Datloran My guess to why CCP defaults you to captain quarters instead of the current hangar view is because they consider it bad game design to make a strict separation between the space game and Incarna. Even though it is this strict separation (or wall) the people here keep asking for. In some regard I can understand why; having a major part of the game "hidden" is generally not a good design. In fact, it seems like CQ will be used as an opportunity to advertise some other less known game features (such as pirate epic arcs) making these more assessable for players and further diminish the separation between the space game and Incarna. I'll have to disagree with your reasoning here because it could be used for almost every feature of the game. Has the in-space part of the game remained hidden from you for very long because you had to find the undock button and click on it? Are wormholes hopelessly forgotten because you have to fit special ship modules to find them? Etc. Discovery is one of the major features of EVE. And that includes discovering the tools. Originally by: Jowen Datloran Still, I too find it hugely immersion breaking that a pod pilot exits his pod every time he docks for a few seconds to recharge his capacitor and shields. Couldn't agree moore.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.17 22:06:00 - [130] I do agree with people that say that incarna will allow players to discover other aspects of eve that have otherwise been hidden. I for one still havn't discovered how to actually start the galente epic arc. And i'm hoping the CQ will point me in the right direction. So don't get me wrong, I do want to see Incarna become a usefull addition to EVE. I'm worried however that if the CQ is going to be forced onto players to sell some more in game monocles, that it will quickly lose its charm. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Reid Lutman	Posted - 2011.06.18 00:46:00 - [131] I'm looking forward to CQ. For me, the current station look became stale long ago. It'll be refreshing to look at something new. It's also exciting to think how it will evolve in the future. Have some faith
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2011.06.18 00:52:00 - [132] Originally by: Reid Lutman Have some faith My faith in CCP will return SoonÖ.
Hal IV	Posted - 2011.06.18 00:55:00 - [133] /signed
Telvani Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber	Posted - 2011.06.18 01:01:00 - [134] /signed Failing to improve the game was not longer an option for CCP it seems, they are hell bent on making it worse.
Ronald Raygunn Amarr Inferi Legion	Posted - 2011.06.18 01:09:00 - [135] Originally by: Sandviched Originally by: Hyperforce99 Originally by: Sandviched -10/10 tribibad troll Yes if I were trolling this would be a horrible trolling thread, but since this is a genuine question, go seek your sandviches somewhere else. I'm sorry, am I messing up your perfect carebear dream? If your computer can't handle incarna then why complain? it's your fault your computer can't handle it? not ccp's also it's their product.. they can do what thy want with it.. not you You're either a CCP alt or a window licking, poisoned kool-aid drinking moron. In either case, 1) what does carebear have to do with it? and 2) the key to keeping your customer base is to keep them happy. I suspect that the former has something to do with being edgy and cool so players will think you're trendy and hip. The latter seems to go over your head. It's not my responsibility to buy a new PC because devs want to force things I don't want on me. If their cash grab affects performance of the game, I'll just stop playing, period. I will not buy stupid vanity items that serve no purpose other than to prey on our consumer mentality. If everyone else wants to, that's fine by me. But I pay for the game like all the rest of the players, and I believe that the option should be in our hands, not CCPs. If they don't like that, great. There are many other good MMOs that ill pay for and enjoy the way I want to play them.
Taedrin Gallente Zero Percent Tax Haven	Posted - 2011.06.18 01:18:00 - [136] GOOD GOD, why do you people have such short memories? CCP is not supporting both hangar view and CQ for the same reason why they don't support a Linux version of the client on top of Mac and PC and the same reason why they no longer support the "classic" client. MOre code to support is more expensive to support, produces more bugs to fix, which makes players unhappy. NOW TO BE HONEST, CCP should do what they did with the "classic" client - continue to support both code bases for a period while people take their time upgrading their computers to handle CQ reasonably well. ---------- Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident" Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.18 01:24:00 - [137] Originally by: Reid Lutman I'm looking forward to CQ. For me, the current station look became stale long ago. It'll be refreshing to look at something new. It's also exciting to think how it will evolve in the future. Have some faith You know what they say about optimists? They're just bad informed pessimists The thing you seem to forget in your part about faith is CCPs track-record of failing to deliver excellence in the future. Let's be realistic and tell you a little story. CCP said last year roughly around this time (AUG/SEPT), their roadmap for Eve+Dust+WoD is fixed and can't be thrown over, as they already had invested too much into it and their hands were practically tied. They couldn't address the issues the CSM brought up which caused a longer period of torches and pitchforks being swung on several communication channels. In the face of this CCP reconsidered it's hard line on this and sc****d a small team together to work on small fixes, Team BFF. Practically the only one delivering excellence the last two expansions. CCP also said that they get to reschedule their roadmap in about 12 months so that more than those small bugfixes could be worked on, read stuff like Sov or FW or POS or the UI, stuff that is buggering Eve for years now in in dire need of a redesign/rework. Now, fast forward. Next Tuesday we get 1 CQ for all stations really just with the basics, no new gameplay there. Really just eyecandy and the bling for cash store. No new content. This was also be said to be about immersion and playing a character instead of a ship in accordance with the lore. CCP hasn't got the other 3 CQs ready, nor is there anything on the horizon for additional, fresh and new gameplay or content. Why I'm telling you this? Well, if CCP is going to start working on that old content already in game next run as promised roughly a year ago, when and with what manpower do they polish that Incarna stuff off (you know, boosters, black market, minigames, bars, conference rooms, fluff, etc.pp)? How long will Incarna simmer in it's current state? I know that CCP has a schedule for this on the desk and I'm amused that so far this one didn't make it to the blogs or forums. You might wonder why.. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Cypeth Ramir	Posted - 2011.06.18 02:14:00 - [138] /signed
Reid Lutman	Posted - 2011.06.18 02:18:00 - [139] Edited by: Reid Lutman on 18/06/2011 02:21:28 Edited by: Reid Lutman on 18/06/2011 02:19:23 Originally by: Tres Farmer Edited by: Tres Farmer on 18/06/2011 01:32:40 Originally by: Reid Lutman I'm looking forward to CQ. For me, the current station look became stale long ago. It'll be refreshing to look at something new. It's also exciting to think how it will evolve in the future. Have some faith You know what they say about optimists? They're just bad informed pessimists The thing you seem to forget in your part about faith is CCPs track-record of failing to deliver excellence in the future. Let's me tell you a little story. CCP said last year roughly around this time (AUG/SEPT), their roadmap for Eve+Dust+WoD is fixed and can't be thrown over, as they already had invested too much into it and their hands were practically tied. They couldn't address issues the CSM brought up which caused a longer period of torches and pitchforks being swung on several communication channels. In the face of this CCP reconsidered it's hard line on this and scrped a small team together to work on little fixes, Team BFF. Practically the only one delivering said excellence the last two expansions. CCP also said that they get to reschedule their roadmap in about 12 months so that more than those small bugfixes could be worked on, read: stuff like Sov or FW or POS or the UI, stuff that is buggering Eve for years now and in dire need of a redesign/rework. Now, fast forward. Next Tuesday we'll get 1 CQ for all stations really just with the basics, no new gameplay there. Just eyecandy and the bling for cash store. No new content. This was also said to be about immersion and playing a character instead of a ship in accordance with the lore (in my eyse they failed that one partly, but whatever). CCP hasn't got the other 3 CQs ready yet, nor is there anything on the horizon for additional, fresh and new gameplay or content. Why am I telling you this? Well, if CCP is going to start working on that old content already in game in the next expansion-cycle as promised roughly a year ago, when and with what manpower do they polish that Incarna stuff off (you know, boosters, black market, minigames, bars, conference rooms, fluff, etc.pp)? How long will Incarna simmer in it's current state? I know that CCP has a schedule for this on the desk and I'm amused that so far this one didn't make it to the blogs or forums. You might wonder why.. CCP are always making updates and fixes to the game. They also release new content, which is important to keep the game feeling 'fresh'. They have an ambitious vision for the future and CQ is another step on this road. I subscribe to eve because of these comming developments. I think Eve is going places. I've been playing Eve for 7 years, and looking back it's easy to see that EVE has improved alot. Thats why there are alot more subscribers today (When i started peak server numbers were around 5/6k). That's why* i have faith. I think there's a silent majority of eve players that are looking forward to CQ.
Benilopax Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.18 02:29:00 - [140] Cos at the moment, if it was optional hardly anyone would use it as you can't do anything different in CQ than you can in pod. CCP want this to be tested by as many people as possible, basically anyone who's docked being in CQ will help CCP learn how to make Incarna work beyond the CQ. Maybe when we can go further than the CQ CCP will make it optional. CCP want incarna to work for EVE and WoD so we are going to have to deal with being Beta testers for a game we may never play. I'll call CCP out to tell me I'm wrong... ----------------------------------- New Eden Chronicles: Prime, Coming soon.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.18 02:38:00 - [141] Originally by: Reid Lutman snip CCP are always making updates and fixes to the game. They also release new content, which is important to keep the game feeling 'fresh'. snap I think there's a silent majority of eve players that are looking forward to CQ. The game might feel fresh, yes. But if stuff doesn't work as expected your customers aren't satisfied. Which brings us to your 2nd point there. No doubt the majority is looking forward to Incarna.. I know I am, but there is that with those expectations and how CCP handles them. From my personal POV they handle them badly and this is why we get thread-noughts with nerd-rage once those features make it to TQ. I got nothing against hyping Incarna and the dress-up and stuff.. all dandy. Same about nice-to-have-but-not-on-the-horizon-gameplay-content for that thingy. But CCP should also have the dignity and professionalism to tell it's customers what they can realistically expect and when this roughly might be. And if there are valid (well, in my POV) questions and concerns regarding this new feature, they should be addressed.. you know, to like manage expectations. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Malak Alraheem	Posted - 2011.06.18 02:39:00 - [142] So I went to SiSi to see what all the fuss was about. So am I to understand that all the functionality of the task bar on the left side is slated to actually go away? Because it was all there when I took a look. Oh sure, you can walk around and waste a crap load of time trying to figure out how to do some basic stuff, but you never actually HAVE to leave the balcony if you don't want to. The Scotty timer appears to be based from when you hit 'dock'. Now if the hangar and all the other functionality from the left side IS going away then yeah, something needs to be done about this mess, but if not, it does not 'appear' to be that big of a deal.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.18 03:19:00 - [143] Originally by: Malak Alraheem So I went to SiSi to see what all the fuss was about. So am I to understand that all the functionality of the task bar on the left side is slated to actually go away? Because it was all there when I took a look. Oh sure, you can walk around and waste a crap load of time trying to figure out how to do some basic stuff, but you never actually HAVE to leave the balcony if you don't want to. The Scotty timer appears to be based from when you hit 'dock'. Now if the hangar and all the other functionality from the left side IS going away then yeah, something needs to be done about this mess, but if not, it does not 'appear' to be that big of a deal. Why not just read the OP? It's all there in very simple terms. And yes, some of the current hangar functionality was removed in the CQ implementation on SISI.
Malak Alraheem	Posted - 2011.06.18 04:29:00 - [144] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Malak Alraheem So I went to SiSi to see what all the fuss was about. So am I to understand that all the functionality of the task bar on the left side is slated to actually go away? Because it was all there when I took a look. Oh sure, you can walk around and waste a crap load of time trying to figure out how to do some basic stuff, but you never actually HAVE to leave the balcony if you don't want to. The Scotty timer appears to be based from when you hit 'dock'. Now if the hangar and all the other functionality from the left side IS going away then yeah, something needs to be done about this mess, but if not, it does not 'appear' to be that big of a deal. Why not just read the OP? It's all there in very simple terms. And yes, some of the current hangar functionality was removed in the CQ implementation on SISI. Ok, I looked again at the OP and the only piece missing is that the prototype version shown three years ago made you kick an extra button to get in to the quarters rather than logging in directly as it is now. (unless there is something much deeper in the video that I might have skipped). Now, I just went back to SiSi to see the 'some of the current hangar functionality was removed in the CQ implementation on SISI.' you mention. Now it is late here and I am a bit tired, so I freely admit I might have missed something, but I could not see any loss of functionality to the client from when I docked to when I flew back out other than I was now standing on a useless catwalk and I cannot freely spin my ship anymore. I could check the market, refit and reload my ship, change ships, chat in comms, look at my notepad, etc the same way I could before. All of it done without having to once 'walk anywhere'. What change did you observe that resulted in a loss of functionality?
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.18 04:43:00 - [145] Originally by: Malak Alraheem snip I could check the market, refit and reload my ship, change ships, chat in comms, look at my notepad, etc the same way I could before. All of it done without having to once 'walk anywhere'. What change did you observe that resulted in a loss of functionality? Try to do the following on Sisi and TQ: - swap ship by drag+drop it from the ship window into the hangar - doubleclick ship to open cargobay - rclick ship to open drone bay/cargo bay PI was disliked (besides other design faults) for it's enormous clicking for simple tasks. You still can do some of the above, but now you have to aim your mouse on the small yellow 3D ship interface all the time. So far my avatar faces the CQ upon docking, not the 3D ship interface. Every time. And when you log in on the station the small 3D ship interface on the table doesn't respond unless you walk forward. Every time. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Prey Forme	Posted - 2011.06.18 05:05:00 - [146] I have watched the video showing the CQ and it reminds me of some badly coded FPS. If they do go ahead and force this on people, I think they are going to be in a lot of trouble. I didn't sign up for this and I don't want it. What next? Goblins, fairy's and quests for the sword of ages. :)
Malak Alraheem	Posted - 2011.06.18 05:11:00 - [147] Edited by: Malak Alraheem on 18/06/2011 05:11:21 Originally by: Tres Farmer - swap ship by drag+drop it from the ship window into the hangar - doubleclick ship to open cargobay - rclick ship to open drone bay/cargo bay OK, fair enough. I can see why you would be annoyed with the changes. -I always right click on the ship in the ships menu and choose 'make active' -I double click on the ship in the ship menu to open the cargo bay -I either right-click on the ship in the ship menu or click on the drone bay in the lower left of the fitting window. The way you do things is not the way I do things so did not see those changes. All three of the examples you give above I handled directly through the ship menu by right clicking on the ship or via the fittings window (both of which are still present) and none of it via the annoying holographic 3d ship projector that was added to CQ. Yeah, if I were you I guess I would be unhappy. Thank you for showing me what I missed.
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.18 05:18:00 - [148] Originally by: Malak Alraheem Originally by: Tres Farmer - swap ship by drag+drop it from the ship window into the hangar - doubleclick ship to open cargobay - rclick ship to open drone bay/cargo bay OK, fair enough. I can see why you would be annoyed with the changes. -I always right click on the ship in the ships menu and choose 'make active' -I double click on the ship in the ship menu to open the cargo bay -I either right-click on the ship in the ship menu or click on the drone bay in the lower left of the fitting window. The way you do things is not the way I do things so did not see those changes. All three of the examples you give above I handled directly through the ship menu by right clicking on the ship or via the fittings window (both of which are still present) and none of it via the annoying holographic 3d ship projector that was added to CQ. Yeah, if I were you I guess I would be unhappy. Thank you for showing me what I missed. No worries. Most of the times it's the bigger picture that's being missed. Personally I don't swap ships that often, so I don't actually use the drag+drop option. The other two I use on a regular basis though. And if CCP were aware of these issues (try to bugreport them, I dare you, LOL) they could work around this with some minor tweaks. What instead will happen is a threadnought on/after patch-day that will complain about those features (and others I missed), because the Dev's don't post in the test-server-forums, which in return implies it's being ignored, which causes less people to post there in the first place, etc pp. .. negative feedback loop. Result: CCP fails at excellence and expectation management. Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.18 10:38:00 - [149] Originally by: Taedrin GOOD GOD, why do you people have such short memories? CCP is not supporting both hangar view and CQ for the same reason why they don't support a Linux version of the client on top of Mac and PC and the same reason why they no longer support the "classic" client. MOre code to support is more expensive to support, produces more bugs to fix, which makes players unhappy. NOW TO BE HONEST, CCP should do what they did with the "classic" client - continue to support both code bases for a period while people take their time upgrading their computers to handle CQ reasonably well. Code wise the CQ is a layer on top of the current hangar system. The entire set is still there, the hangars, the ships, the lighting and rendering engine are un-altered, or at the very least, still capable of supporting the same functionality as it has been since the start of EVE. The MORE code your talking about is the code thats adding in the CQ using the carbon tech. So, I can't believe that supporting both the hangar and the CQ as separate environments is as hard to achieve as you think. Because if the CQ layer is not active the hangar is still there, supporting the original camera drone view really doesn't add that much more code... especially since the main HUD of the game, the NeoCom has been unaltered. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Kerrisone	Posted - 2011.06.18 17:04:00 - [150] Just a scant few days left for CCP to ignore this and other threads before we can all look forward to hopping into the feedback and issues threads about all the stupid changes that didn't have to be made the way they were or about all the bugs forcing said environment has spawned unto us.
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.19 03:41:00 - [151] At this point I think our efforts would be better spend on coming up with the most creative ways of saying, "I told you so"... The EVE Personality Test
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2011.06.19 04:31:00 - [152] Originally by: Maul555 At this point I think our efforts would be better spend on coming up with the most creative ways of saying, "I told you so"... LOL. I gotta find some picture with a guy that's eating popcorn and has a beer in his hand, sitting on his sofa.. to the image-search!! Get rid of Rooms with Doors - Shortrange Jumpdrives for everybody!
Maul555 Amarr Reliables Inc BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2011.06.19 05:26:00 - [153] I plan on making a bug report for every bit of missing functionality I can find and I suggest everyone here do the same. And also CCP, why have a bed if I cant lie down in it and log off? The EVE Personality Test
Oxylan	Posted - 2011.06.19 05:48:00 - [154] Edited by: Oxylan on 19/06/2011 05:50:06 Signed to OP, im old EvE veteran i play since 2007 i have 4 account and so far i can run all 4 account simultaneously withaut problems in window mode, incarnia is awesome expansion but probably this kill many hardware configuration even we use low details, CCP dont force us to use CQ station envormient while we dock.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.19 08:41:00 - [155] Yesturday during the tournament broadcast the dev behind Incarna was on the show. One of the first questions they asked him was why they removed the option to spin ships. He said something among the lines of that they wanted to fully connect the space and walking environments for immersion sake and that you can still SPIN YOUR CHARACTER IN PLACE. I call bull **** on that one. To be quite frank: Incarna is not some feature tweak that CCP is introducing. Its a full blown new game engine they have bolted onto the existing one. And while it might have been in development for a long time... There is no way that it will run smoothly for 100% of all players, There are bound to be people that can't use it due to their hardware's or OS configurations. Why they are making it a mandatory and intricate part of the game then is beyond my comprehension. Cause once this go's live, there will be lots of people that will be unable to play the game properly for weeks or even months until this is sorted out. Now CCP seems to understand this, but go's about it the wrong way. Adding a "Temporary" Do not load CQ toggle that leaves the user on a loading screen is incredibly crude. If the entire goal of Incarna is to create immersion then WHY of all things leave the player with a black screen, why haven't you thought of this before and simply kept the hangar view... Hell not loading the CQ layer and leaving the camera focussed on the players ship is more desirable than this. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
San Severina Minmatar Autocannons Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.19 08:47:00 - [156] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Yesturday during the tournament broadcast the dev behind Incarna was on the show. One of the first questions they asked him was why they removed the option to spin ships. He said something among the lines of that they wanted to fully connect the space and walking environments for immersion sake and that you can still SPIN YOUR CHARACTER IN PLACE. I call bull ** on that one. To be quite frank: Incarna is not some feature tweak that CCP is introducing. Its a full blown new game engine they have bolted onto the existing one. And while it might have been in development for a long time... There is no way that it will run smoothly for 100% of all players, There are bound to be people that can't use it due to their hardware's or OS configurations. Why they are making it a mandatory and intricate part of the game then is beyond my comprehension. Cause once this go's live, there will be lots of people that will be unable to play the game properly for weeks or even months until this is sorted out. Now CCP seems to understand this, but go's about it the wrong way. Adding a "Temporary" Do not load CQ toggle that leaves the user on a loading screen is incredibly crude. If the entire goal of Incarna is to create immersion then WHY of all things leave the player with a black screen, why haven't you thought of this before and simply kept the hangar view... Hell not loading the CQ layer and leaving the camera focussed on the players ship is more desirable than this. +1 Bumping my favorite tread! how about a Dev or somebody from the company responding? Just saying! Don't kill the Hangar CCP, don't do it!**
Twistator	Posted - 2011.06.19 08:49:00 - [157] +1 .. completly agree
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.06.19 08:50:00 - [158] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Yesturday during the tournament broadcast the dev behind Incarna was on the show. One of the first questions they asked him was why they removed the option to spin ships. He said something among the lines of that they wanted to fully connect the space and walking environments for immersion sake and that you can still SPIN YOUR CHARACTER IN PLACE. I call bull ** on that one. Politicians use that tact all the time, answering a question without actually answering it. The fact that CCP as a whole have completely ignored this for so long, just goes to show the poor attitude they have towards their player base now. Originally by:** Allestin Villimar Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it. Originally by: Torothanax Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.06.19 09:14:00 - [159] I too put my head in my hands watching the alliance tournament discussion with the dev.
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.19 09:28:00 - [160] Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start... A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing. B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ). D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ) E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture. F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ. G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients) H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring. If this is true... then CCP is heading for a wreck. They should postpone the deployment of CQ now they still can, and improve on their alternatives to the CQ. Cause if it go's live like this... it will be a disaster. --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Asuri Kinnes Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated	Posted - 2011.06.19 11:22:00 - [161] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 19/06/2011 09:44:35 Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start... A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing. B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ). D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ) E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture. F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ. G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients) H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring. --------------------------------------------- I'm monitoring this using CoreTemp, EVGA Precision, Windows Performance (task manager), and by running one, two and three accounts on sisi, and then doing the same on tq to get performance comparisons. Docked, and in space. My testing system isn't uber. AMD dual core 2.6 Ghtz (4 core 3.2 ghtz on the other machine) Windows 7 x64 (both machines), 8 gigs ram (both machines), 1 gig Nvidia GT430 card on this machine (GTX460 on my other machine). I use this machine for baseline testing. It isn't 'Uber' and is probably roughly middle of the road as computers go. Drivers are current as of 2 days ago (I check for updates every Thurs/Fri). If this is true... then CCP is heading for a wreck. They should postpone the deployment of CQ now they still can, and improve on their alternatives to the CQ. Cause if it go's live like this... it will be a disaster. Ahhh hell..... Setting Amarr BS V to training.... Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist NO!
Alpine 69 Rubbish Superheroes	Posted - 2011.06.20 12:13:00 - [162] Bump for importance one day before launch. -
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.06.20 14:22:00 - [163] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Yesturday during the tournament broadcast the dev behind Incarna was on the show. One of the first questions they asked him was why they removed the option to spin ships. He said something among the lines of that they wanted to fully connect the space and walking environments for immersion sake and that you can still SPIN YOUR CHARACTER IN PLACE. I call bull **** on that one. To be quite frank: Incarna is not some feature tweak that CCP is introducing. Its a full blown new game engine they have bolted onto the existing one. And while it might have been in development for a long time... There is no way that it will run smoothly for 100% of all players, There are bound to be people that can't use it due to their hardware's or OS configurations. Why they are making it a mandatory and intricate part of the game then is beyond my comprehension. Cause once this go's live, there will be lots of people that will be unable to play the game properly for weeks or even months until this is sorted out. Now CCP seems to understand this, but go's about it the wrong way. Adding a "Temporary" Do not load CQ toggle that leaves the user on a loading screen is incredibly crude. If the entire goal of Incarna is to create immersion then WHY of all things leave the player with a black screen, why haven't you thought of this before and simply kept the hangar view... Hell not loading the CQ layer and leaving the camera focussed on the players ship is more desirable than this. During that same broadcast CCP Senior Producer Torfi Frans Olafsson said a bunch of words about immersion and must have repeated four or five times how dingy and "icky and filthy" the CQ's were and how the capsuleers considered their pod their home. As if he has absolutely no idea that current implementation of his pet expansion has those capsuleers forced out of their pods and into those terrible CQs. Go figure... ... If you like choice please support this topic in the Assembly Hall. Thanks.
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.06.20 14:29:00 - [164] Edited by: Wacktopia on 20/06/2011 14:30:53 Originally by: Hyperforce99 Why have you changed your stance on this? /support Cannot understand why they changed from that ^ to the way it is now. And then under massive fire from the player base to remain stubborn and not change it back after weeks and months of people explaining exactly how the 'new' method is worse. Just cannot understand - it involves so more design work than is there already. They have the hanger view from existing eve and then have the new CQ system. Why they do not just put the "leave ship" option in to join the two is beyond me completely. Please CCP, listen to your players here? Postpone CQ. Get this right first time. Please don't wreck docking.
Di Sembowel	Posted - 2011.06.20 14:33:00 - [165] F*CK CQ. Fix existing problems instead
Datei Naru	Posted - 2011.06.21 06:38:00 - [166] Only few hours to go till the inevitable sh*tstorm hits Tranquility and hundreds of people will be unable to play...
Constantinus Maximus Paxian Expeditionary Force	Posted - 2011.06.21 06:55:00 - [167] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 19/06/2011 09:44:35 Originally by: Zora'e Just got back from SISI. New build. Lets see where to start... A: Esc menu audio & chat tab produces a blank wall of nothing. B: 1 client on sisi uses the same CPU as three currently on TQ C: 1 client on sisi uses 5-6 times as much GPU resources as one client on TQ (I.E. I can run 3 clients on TQ and still not use as much CPU/GPU resources as ONE client running CQ). D: Non-Intuitive UI interface while in CQ (i.e. it's even worse than what is currently on TQ) E: Option to turn off CQ leaves you with a static picture. F: Docking times for a single client is 3 times longer than on TQ. G: Docking times for three clients takes 1.5 minutes ( -vs- 15 seconds on TQ for three clients) H: Overall UI functionality is... while not reduced... greatly more troublesome to access with CQ controls My Prediction for Incarna's success: Not a snow balls chance in hell CCP isn't going to have to do damage control and undo 3/4 of the garbage they are doing before all is said and done or face losing quite probably 1/4 or more of their subscription base due to the ultimate fiasco Incarna is shaping up to be. This is a shame because I was looking forward to the possibilities Incarna could bring. --------------------------------------------- I'm monitoring this using CoreTemp, EVGA Precision, Windows Performance (task manager), and by running one, two and three accounts on sisi, and then doing the same on tq to get performance comparisons. Docked, and in space. My testing system isn't uber. AMD dual core 2.6 Ghtz (4 core 3.2 ghtz on the other machine) Windows 7 x64 (both machines), 8 gigs ram (both machines), 1 gig Nvidia GT430 card on this machine (GTX460 on my other machine). I use this machine for baseline testing. It isn't 'Uber' and is probably roughly middle of the road as computers go. Drivers are current as of 2 days ago (I check for updates every Thurs/Fri). If this is true... then CCP is heading for a wreck. They should postpone the deployment of CQ now they still can, and improve on their alternatives to the CQ. Cause if it go's live like this... it will be a disaster. Don't you know marketing and graphics sell better then word-of-mouth and content........ in CCPs world.
Valdrahir Mendrenon	Posted - 2011.06.21 06:56:00 - [168] Well.... I absolutely love EVE. I'm pretty much a die hard fan. Right now, I'm playing it on a rather decrepit laptop which gets.... 8 FPS. The incredible thing is that the game is still playable at that frame rate; but I really don't see any possibility of playing in the CQ for me. As soon as the Hangar is gone, I'm going to have to just stop playing until I get a new computer. No idea when that will be, so... yeah. I'm not too big a fan of Incarna.
Stygian Knight Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.06.21 11:05:00 - [169] signed
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.06.21 11:07:00 - [170] I get the feeling this type of thread might gain more gravity after people realise the impact of changing a ship if multi-clienting or on a slower machine.
Heanna	Posted - 2011.06.21 11:46:00 - [171] This all sounds crap. /signed
Mirabi Tiane	Posted - 2011.06.21 12:27:00 - [172] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Yesturday during the tournament broadcast the dev behind Incarna was on the show. One of the first questions they asked him was why they removed the option to spin ships. He said something among the lines of that they wanted to fully connect the space and walking environments for immersion sake and that you can still SPIN YOUR CHARACTER IN PLACE. How many times does CCP have to be informed that the idea of capsuleers decanting every single time they dock, no matter where they are or what their reason for docking is, damages immersion? ...An infinite number of times, because they can't hear over the sound of their arms breaking as they pat themselves on the back.
Nathal Kryos Mean Corp Mean Coalition	Posted - 2011.06.21 12:31:00 - [173] /signed
Nikki Sanderson	Posted - 2011.06.21 12:43:00 - [174] Originally by: Mirabi Tiane How many times does CCP have to be informed that the idea of capsuleers decanting every single time they dock, no matter where they are or what their reason for docking is, damages immersion? ^ just this. Also, the EVE engine is strange enough as it was already, with sometimes taxing CPU 100% for no apparent reason with the old station environment already disabled.
ucntkilme Amarr No Bullshit Jokers Wild.	Posted - 2011.06.21 12:54:00 - [175] I support every part of the OP and others. There are players such as myself who couldnt care less about CQ or WIS or changing clothes. This added 'functionality' is for the RPers so why force the rest of the 98% of eve who think CVA and their RPing is pathetic and gay to in effect become RPers ourselves. At least let us choose whether we want to take part in this massive-crap-heap you call 'incarna' or not. Way to go on giving WT's something to entertain themselves while further perpetuating the massive station camping in jita 4-4 or other trade-hub systems though.... Why introduce this CRAP anyway? CCP trying to appeal to the 12 year old children that think gaming is walking around talking to people? How bout you answer AND listen to your DEDICATED player-base instead of your idiotic drunk-ass employees who have absolutely ZERO good ideas when it comes to eve. The last good thing that has come from eve in all reality was wormholes and sleeper AI, and that was TWO major patches ago CCP...
Mirabi Tiane	Posted - 2011.06.21 13:02:00 - [176] Originally by: ucntkilme This added 'functionality' is for the RPers so why force the rest of the 98% of eve who think CVA and their RPing is pathetic and gay to in effect become RPers ourselves. It's not, actually. It's for the people who just don't care either way, and the people who lap up whatever CCP gives them regardless of how flawed it is. As a roleplayer, I find the details of CQ's implementation very ill-considered in several ways. For one thing, it should be optional (with the original hangar view preserved and a "Leave Pod" button added).
ucntkilme Amarr No Bullshit Jokers Wild.	Posted - 2011.06.21 13:07:00 - [177] Originally by: Mirabi Tiane Originally by: ucntkilme This added 'functionality' is for the RPers so why force the rest of the 98% of eve who think CVA and their RPing is pathetic and gay to in effect become RPers ourselves. It's not, actually. It's for the people who just don't care either way, and the people who lap up whatever CCP gives them regardless of how flawed it is. As a roleplayer, I find the details of CQ's implementation very ill-considered in several ways. For one thing, it should be optional (with the original hangar view preserved and a "Leave Pod" button added). While I agree that it should be optional and that CQ's implementation is very ill-considered. Despite that being the fact, being an RPer (i am not one) I'm sure you can see from an RPers standpoint where CQ and WIS in general is geared toward that area of gameplay and to force everyone else into that arena of gaming is completely stupid. I'm sure the average age of an eve player will degrade vastly after the full incarna release, and lower aged players without the smarts or intelligence or maturity to play a game as vast as eve is never a good thing. Plus who will I shoot now? Everyone is going to hate having to de-pod every time they dock up, half of eve will quit and make room for the 10-12 year olds coming in.
Mirabi Tiane	Posted - 2011.06.21 13:20:00 - [178] Originally by: ucntkilme I'm sure you can see from an RPers standpoint where CQ and WIS in general is geared toward that area of gameplay Yes. It's sad that it fails at fulfilling any purpose even within that area. Originally by: ucntkilme and to force everyone else into that arena of gaming is completely stupid. Non-consensual RP happens in EVE, just as non-consensual PvP happens (example of both happening at the same time: RP corp/alliance wardecs non-RP corp/alliance and negotiations for surrender must be roleplayed). That said, "Incarna" doesn't currently have anything to do with RP, and it won't for a long while. The entire playerbase would benefit from WIS being optional, now and later on. So, in all the ways that matter to this subject, you and I agree.
ucntkilme Amarr No Bullshit Jokers Wild.	Posted - 2011.06.21 13:24:00 - [179] Originally by: Mirabi Tiane Originally by: ucntkilme I'm sure you can see from an RPers standpoint where CQ and WIS in general is geared toward that area of gameplay Yes. It's sad that it fails at fulfilling any purpose even within that area. Originally by: ucntkilme and to force everyone else into that arena of gaming is completely stupid. Non-consensual RP happens in EVE, just as non-consensual PvP happens (example of both happening at the same time: RP corp/alliance wardecs non-RP corp/alliance and negotiations for surrender must be roleplayed). That said, "Incarna" doesn't currently have anything to do with RP, and it won't for a long while. The entire playerbase would benefit from WIS being optional, now and later on. So, in all the ways that matter to this subject, you and I agree. yes we do agree I'll give you that. Forcing us to use it is obsurd and the intelligence of CCP needs to really be called into question on their thinking behind it.
SNeAkYbRiT Gunslingers Corp	Posted - 2011.06.21 14:00:00 - [180] You all think CCP gives 2 rats asses what you all think? lol If they did, they would of listened to all the other problems that peeps have been crying out since the start of the game, CCP is a company and is only interested in one think and thats MONEY...yes it started out that they cared, now they have better numbers, and don't have time to listen. I'd like the option to be able to leave my ship or NOT!, shouldn't this be our choice? seen the CQ on the test server and soon got very bored of it, rather spin me ship. So when CCP say they are listening, they aint really. So pls will you all wake up and smell the coffee...companies DO not care what you think, just like the banks!
Hyperforce99 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.06.22 16:11:00 - [181] Still havn't seen an anwser, anyone else still wants to know? --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2011.06.22 16:21:00 - [182] Originally by: Hyperforce99 Still havn't seen an anwser, anyone else still wants to know? Word has it that CCP has recently hired the PR genius Anthony Weiner. It is only a matter of time before he sticks in his comments, and then you can pull out the truth. When Devs start to sound like politicians, something is wrong. My faith in CCP will return SoonÖ

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one 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.

You need a later shader model because all pants in Incarna are US sizes, needs more polygons

You need a later shader model because all pants in Incarna are US sizes, needs more polygons