EVE Search - One Question Still: Dock>ShipSpinning>CQ, or Dock>CQ>ShipSpinning?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

One Question Still: Dock>ShipSpinning>CQ, or Dock>CQ>ShipSpinning?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Sha Dar eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred	Posted - 2011.07.02 19:38:00 - [31] From the blog. "and this environment will be available until Incarna performance is similar to pre-Incarna performance." This. You WILL be forced to use CQ whether you want to or not as soon as this ption is removed.
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.07.02 19:45:00 - [32] Originally by: CCP Navigator This is something that is best addressed by the team responsible for the design. For a change of this nature you can definitely expect a Dev Blog in the future. I appreciate you guys have a lot of questions and here is my promise to you: I will be gathering a list of the most asked questions regarding the return of ship spinning, minimum specs and other issues raised form the blog and shall present these to CCP Zulu, CCP Flying Scotsman and CCP Soundwave next week. Some of these questions may have to be answered by product owners of various different teams but we will keep you up to date as soon as we can. how hard is it to add a button ffs? dock - spinny old view- hit button- enter CQ you make this sound liek a task that will take a whole redesign. add a button!
Commissar Kate Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive	Posted - 2011.07.02 19:52:00 - [33] Dock > Hangar > Button to disembark to(CQ) as I said last week. It's very simple and I know they can do it, just watch the 08' fanfest video or whenever it was.
Spanking Monkeys	Posted - 2011.07.02 19:55:00 - [34] Edited by: Spanking Monkeys on 02/07/2011 19:56:22 ive never wanted this incarna crap, i understand many people love thier man barbie. so to give us both what we want. dock > old hanger(option in esc menu to acutomaticly skip this) > hit button > enter CQ why are you not implementing this and instead fart arsing about making the client use more than it needs to?
Renan Ruivo Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance	Posted - 2011.07.02 19:56:00 - [35] Originally by: Sha Dar From the blog. "and this environment will be available until Incarna performance is similar to pre-Incarna performance." This. You WILL be forced to use CQ whether you want to or not as soon as this ption is removed. Personally, i'll wait until that happens to start crying BS. CCP Zulu stated that they will remove it in the future, but that future can be a few months from now or a few years form now. Hell, from what trebor has stated, they could even keep that option. Also, according that what trebor stated, we will be able to "dock to that option", and that both options will be interchangeable. So it looks like we won't have to go through CQ to get to the ship-spinning part, and looks like you'll be able to freely switch between both these. So if the "door" is replaced by ship spinning, it could mean that "door" will become the "pod room" and once you enter it, you enter your Pod and go to the new hangar. And if you want to enter CQ, you leave the pod and enter CQ through that door. If that's the case, then it also means that there will be a "disembark" button. Then again, this is what i have gathered from the little info that Trebor gave on his post. Sounds good to me. ____________ Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:01:00 - [36] Originally by: Renan Ruivo Edited by: Renan Ruivo on 02/07/2011 18:48:50 Originally by: Mr LaForge Why is it not possible to simply put the old environment back? Did you throw it all away? It worked beautifully. Well, CCP hasn't gave any answers to this exact question, but i am going with "It is because you don't get to see your space doll on hangar view. And unless you see your space doll, you will not spend money on the NeX store.". It is controversial, but it is the only one that gives sense to that adamant mentality of not bringing old ship hangar view back. Captain's Quarters have no use at the moment, so unless you are forced into it, there is really no reason to go there. And if you don't go there, you don't see shiny new clothes. If that is the case i'll cry BS. This is just the first version of the CQ, and i'm quite sure it'll have a lot more content and functionality on the future, and a boatload of reasons for people to go there. Navigator.. CCP... we want the option to disembark instead of being forced into CQ from the get go. Forcing us: 1: Breaks immersion. It makes no sense.. you're just docking to load some ammo, but still you exit your ship with your pod, exit your pod with your avatar - which from EVE canon is a little unpleasant for the capsuleer - naked (on a catwalk and on public no less), then go inside, dress up, and walk back to the balcony. Then load ammo, then repeat the entire process to undock. Why not just dock, load ammo, undock?. 2: Means that you presume to know more about what we want than we know ourselves. This does not sounds like the CCP i knew and came to love back on 2003. 3: Makes no sense. We will willingly go there once some real functionality is added to WiS (which Captain's Quarters is part of). Trust us. Originally by: Razin Originally by: Renan Ruivo Thanks for the reply, Navigator. I do hope, however, that you bring to the attention of the responsible people that what we want, precisely, is not to Spin Ships. You need to start speaking for yourself here dude. While I do agree on your major points, this statement doesn't represent the entirety of this issue. I'm just afraid that is you keep pushing this you'll get a door with all that functionality. The "us" and "we" on the posts i make, allude to the fact that there are more people other than myself that sees things the way i am writing them. Its not just me. As you pointed out, its not what you see.. and that is fine. You're not included on the "us" and "we". Its just semantics. Note that in no moment i have written "YOUR ENTIRE PLAYERBASE" like other people do. If you read that, or anything that gave you that impression just point it out and i'll correct it. As for myself, i'd see no issue on getting all the functionalities that i pointed out with a wallpaper on the background well if CQ and future plans have like you know, a purpose or cool features people would use cq, i like the eve tv, but i wont watch it every time i dock and it would be really cool if players could upload game footage to show on everyones eve tv, immagine watching a live corp theft? maybe not live, but a recent corp theif. it be thrilling, but if im doing missions and just docking to complete... i dont wanna load cq, i dont even wanna see my space doll. when incarna is a bit more complete, they won't need t force people to use it, so why now?
Nikki Sanderson	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:06:00 - [37] It's pretty aggravating how they just don't want to understand that performance isn't even the main issue why people want the hangar view back. Why is it so hard to understand that all people want is making unpodding an option? Not one dev has acknowledged that, they all just play dumb, sidestep the issue and act like they address it BUT THEY DON'T ****ING ADDRESS IT. Arggghhhh!!!! They talk about adding ship spinning "in some form" in the future when all they need to do is put in the perfectly fine old hangar and add an option to disembark. Why is that? Would just one dev tell us why it's not incredibly dumb that we now leave our pods when we dock up for 5 seconds because we forgot to refill cap booster charges or because we forgot to click "Accept" in the agent conversation?
Renan Ruivo Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:07:00 - [38] Yeah i'd go even further, like i suggested on another thread deep down on the assembly hall. Make it so alliance/corp leaders can feed whatever info they like into their members EVE TV's. Mandatory CTA's, alliance/corp operations, new e-mails, etc.. ____________ Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
Mirabi Tiane	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:09:00 - [39] Why haven't the immersion damaging aspects of CQ been addressed, i.e. "decant by default every single time you dock" and the ridiculous location of the pod?
Soden Rah Gallente EVE University Ivy League	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:17:00 - [40] The return of the hanger view, and not having to disembark on every docking (for immersion and convenience) are major issues for me too. I will not be resubbing unless this gets a permanent satisfactory solution. The ship spinning itself is (mostly? sometimes? partly?) an in joke, a standard barer of deeper issues. I want CCP to understand that for me at least, being able to alter the rotation rate by whatever means of my ship while I stand on my balcony, while potentially cool/amusing for 5 minutes... is not a solution to not having the hanger view... Please make sure that whoever writes the dev blog on this topic appreciates that while ship spinning is an issue, its not THE issue (for a good number of us at least) with CQ and the lack of hanger view... I have stated many times (before release) why we Need the hanger view that we dock into and then have CQ happen as a station button afterwards (and not, I want to be clear on this, as a temporary option) so I wont do so again. (unless you really can't remember/find the reasons in which case I will repeat them one last time) But please make sure the dev blog does address the issue of role play and immersion, as well as convenience and speed, and yes spinning. -------- By Grfmsv÷tn, Eyjafjallaj÷kull, Vatnaj÷kull, and Hekla itself... THIS is my sig. Support Optional CQ
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:25:00 - [41] Originally by: Renan Ruivo Originally by: Mag's Originally by: CCP Navigator Return of ship spinning Stuff about nothing..... But you missed the point entirly. We wanted the choice of when to disembark. You've basically said, 'sure you can have spinning back, but we've left the door open so we can pull it asap.' Yup.. not a misunderstanding on my part, just wishfull thinking. CCP really got it all wrong again /me facepalm. Sorry if it looked as though I meant you missed the point. That wasn't my intention, it was aimed squarely at CCP and the CSM.
Benri Konpaku	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:34:00 - [42] We all know why CCP wont allow us to choose. We all know why they want to do it the way they are going to do it. And we all know what the CSM meeting accomplished. If after all of this CCP is still unwilling to address player concerns and give us what we are asking for, and just try to semantic their way out then there isn't much else to talk about anymore. It's like a Hulk being suicide ganked in hi-sec and the miner still asking the gankers what they are intending to do. Just decide, now. Will you stay and see the inevitable or go now and look for entertainment somewhere else?
Liva Daril Caldari	Posted - 2011.07.02 20:41:00 - [43] Originally by: Liva Daril Why do we have to wait for CCP¦s already stretched thin coding/design resources (bare bone MT store, only single CQ finished, actual station environs ...) coming up with a new "SHIPSPIN OF OZOM"-Hangar, when we already had a perfectly good working one for the last 8 years? As already noted, please support: [Proposal] Return the Old Hangar Back... for Immersion. Quote: His name was John Turbefield!
Renan Ruivo Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance	Posted - 2011.07.02 21:37:00 - [44] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Renan Ruivo Originally by: Mag's Originally by: CCP Navigator Return of ship spinning Stuff about nothing..... But you missed the point entirly. We wanted the choice of when to disembark. You've basically said, 'sure you can have spinning back, but we've left the door open so we can pull it asap.' Yup.. not a misunderstanding on my part, just wishfull thinking. CCP really got it all wrong again /me facepalm. Sorry if it looked as though I meant you missed the point. That wasn't my intention, it was aimed squarely at CCP and the CSM. Oh yes, no. The facepalm wasn't at you, but rather at CCP over that statement. You said exactly what i was thinking then. But to avoid making a quote of the same section and saying the same thing you said, i just quoted you and then added more lol. ____________ Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.07.02 21:55:00 - [45] From devblog discussion thread: Originally by: CCP Navigator Return of ship spinning This is something that a lot of players are curious about and what I can tell you is that we will implement a form of ship spinning but we are not returning to the old hangar view. This new variation will be similar and, while you can spin your ship, it will not be exactly how it was before. The time line for designing, testing and implementing this new variation of ship spinning has not been finalized but we will bring you more information in a future dev blog. All I have to say to this is whatever ship spinning hangar CCP implements, as long as I am inside the spinning ship it's all good. ... Return the Old Hangar Back... for Immersion.
Madcow Minmatar Sebiestor Tribe	Posted - 2011.07.02 22:07:00 - [46] Really docking with CQ on or off before I can leave the station and cleaning the cargohold takes the same time because of the 30 seconds docking limit and my CQ loads in like 4 secs. ______________________ I am just a crazy cow
Elrica bloodbane	Posted - 2011.07.02 22:54:00 - [47] Edited by: Elrica bloodbane on 02/07/2011 20:56:50 The CSM raised concerns with performance running multiple clients after the Incarna launch where the minimum hardware spec will only support one client logged in when in a station environment. CCP will work on creating a minimum hardware spec that supports multiple clients, but wants it to be clear that the current minimum specification aims at single client with low settings.Evil or Very Mad Best not re-sub my other accounts then The CSM helped CCP understand the emotional connection players had with äship spinning". They vehemently demanded the return of the feature, which CCP committed to introduce in some form at a future date. Until that functionality is added back in, the option to not load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. Talk about lack of communication, we want function not ship twirling. What were the csm thinking. CCP every breath you take, every move you make, we'll be watching you.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2011.07.03 03:18:00 - [48] Originally by: Elrica bloodbane Edited by: Elrica bloodbane on 02/07/2011 20:56:50 The CSM raised concerns with performance running multiple clients after the Incarna launch where the minimum hardware spec will only support one client logged in when in a station environment. CCP will work on creating a minimum hardware spec that supports multiple clients, but wants it to be clear that the current minimum specification aims at single client with low settings.Evil or Very Mad Best not re-sub my other accounts then The CSM helped CCP understand the emotional connection players had with äship spinning". They vehemently demanded the return of the feature, which CCP committed to introduce in some form at a future date. Until that functionality is added back in, the option to not load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. Talk about lack of communication, we want function not ship twirling. What were the csm thinking. This. Exactly this. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2011.07.03 18:49:00 - [49] Originally by: Elrica bloodbane Talk about lack of communication, we want function not ship twirling. What were the csm thinking. That's definitely part of the issue, but only a part of the issue. ... Return the Old Hangar Back... for Immersion.
Sarah Scarlett Mackenzie	Posted - 2011.07.03 18:53:00 - [50] Edited by: Sarah Scarlett Mackenzie on 03/07/2011 18:53:26 The old hangar view is still here, so it doesnt seem to be that difficult, to change camera view again. (Just now focus on ship, and see your CQ on the background?) Dont see the big problem, but then again i am not a coder. But as far i know the code should be still somewhere in the caves of EVE.
Sha Dar eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred	Posted - 2011.07.03 19:11:00 - [51] The is no big problem, other than they don't want you to have it back permanently. They have an agenda and they are intent on pushing it no matter what. Ultimately... You WILL use CQ, whether you want to or not. You WILL beta test the WOD engine, whether you want to or not. You WILL have reduced functionality and bloated software, whether you want to or not. After all, Dress up Barbies is the future of eve, isn't it ? Awaiting Infinity
Pace eGuerra	Posted - 2011.07.04 01:48:00 - [52] Edited by: Pace eGuerra on 04/07/2011 01:54:01 Originally by: Renan Ruivo We want hangar view back because it was FAST. We could just dock; double-click our ship's for cargohold; drag ship from the Ship's Hangar to the main-screen to activate it; it made total sense; it didn't break immersion. +1 Thanks for clarifying this. I have been meaning to post something similar. This is about immersion first and foremost. "Ship spinning" is a simple way of referring to it. Docking and appearing on the balcony is immersion breaking. Why spend all that money on back story if the game itself fails to allow us to suspend disbelief? Edit; No doubt somebody at CCP thinks that we are simply resisting change. Duh no. They should actually play the game and then they would understand.
Theoer	Posted - 2011.07.04 02:04:00 - [53] Edited by: Theoer on 04/07/2011 02:05:22 I am not gonna use CQ, just put a picture of the ship instead of the door at least! That shouldnt be too hard isnt it ? It's amazing that with all this technology and progress that you advertise I ended up with a picture of a door and having no ideea what ship is active and what will i undock with! Even a text message saying Active ship: Hull, Ship Name would be enough.
Kaylith Sen	Posted - 2011.07.04 02:16:00 - [54] Originally by: Theoer Edited by: Theoer on 04/07/2011 02:05:22 I am not gonna use CQ, just put a picture of the ship instead of the door at least! That shouldnt be too hard isnt it ? It's amazing that with all this technology and progress that you advertise I ended up with a picture of a door and having no ideea what ship is active and what will i undock with! Even a text message saying Active ship: Hull, Ship Name would be enough. This.
Andraine Coded Arms Corp	Posted - 2011.07.04 19:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Kaylith Sen Originally by: Theoer Edited by: Theoer on 04/07/2011 02:05:22 I am not gonna use CQ, just put a picture of the ship instead of the door at least! That shouldnt be too hard isnt it ? It's amazing that with all this technology and progress that you advertise I ended up with a picture of a door and having no ideea what ship is active and what will i undock with! Even a text message saying Active ship: Hull, Ship Name would be enough. Agreed. I mean, even using a bear basic example such as "just text" goes a long way to explain why the door is so useless. I want hanger view pleeeease. This. yobo
Dorkus Americanus The Laugh Factory	Posted - 2011.07.04 19:47:00 - [56] Originally by: Theoer Edited by: Theoer on 04/07/2011 02:05:22 I am not gonna use CQ, just put a picture of the ship instead of the door at least! That shouldnt be too hard isnt it ? It's amazing that with all this technology and progress that you advertise I ended up with a picture of a door and having no ideea what ship is active and what will i undock with! Even a text message saying Active ship: Hull, Ship Name would be enough. I just keep the ship fitting window open. You can see which ship you have, plus right click on it, an you have the options like before when you would right click on your ship while docked. You can even spin your ship if it pleases you, though it isn't quite the same. I'd be happy for now if they made it so the fitting window is open all the time while docked and CQ off until they found something better.
Ketria Saine Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2011.07.04 20:18:00 - [57] Edited by: Ketria Saine on 04/07/2011 20:20:14 One piece of information I discovered in the latest EON magazine is that the CQ is the result of six months' development time. Make of that what you will. I have CQ disabled currently as I'm on a borrowed machine while my regular PC is repaired* and it runs CQ at around 3 fps. It is a GeForce 7600 GS, though. I should point out I have CQ disabled on the other computer anyway out of principle until CCP optimise it. What I have done is leave a small Ships window open beneath Station Sevices. It gives all the right-click functionality of the hangar view. It's not perfect, but it will do for now. *Motherboard failure due to a short - not a melting GPU.
Palovana Caldari Inner Fire Inc.	Posted - 2011.07.04 20:24:00 - [58] CCP is still under the misconception that by waving a bunch of (NeX store items) in our faces, we'll give in to our urges and (buy) them. Otherwise they wouldn't have completely nuked the hangar view. Their reason for removing it is the first sentence above. (Keep in mind that the hangar view code still exists in the git/CVS/CVN/Sourcesafe/whatever repository system they're using to hold their source code.) And because they still have yet to realize their mistake here, I'm not paying to extend my accounts. I'll buy PLEX with spare ISK instead if I want to continue playing. ----- CCP is still under the misconception that by waving a bunch of (NeX store items) in our faces, we'll give in to our urges and (buy) them. Bring back the hangar view and its functionality!
Renan Ruivo Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance	Posted - 2011.07.04 20:35:00 - [59] As for the old hangar view, they have said that its tech is "incompatible" with the new rendering tech introduced by the CQ, and that including it back would be as much work as creating a new captain's quarters from scratch. And as we all know, they are working hard on the remaining three CQ's. Could they work on bringing the old hangar back as if it was a fourth CQ? Yes, and apparently they are going to. But since the old one cannot be re-used, i'd rather that they made something similar but upgraded, than work it from the ground up to look exactly the way it did before. ____________ Originally by: CCP Guard Nobody gets to ruin EVE but us!
Callic Veratar	Posted - 2011.07.04 20:53:00 - [60] I'm hoping that the Dock menu item becomes a drop menu with two options: - Dock to Hangar - Dock to CQ That way I don't need to go through the a two step process if I want the CQ or hangar (depending on which is loaded first).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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

His name was John Turbefield!