EVE Search - When do we get the functionality back?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

When do we get the functionality back?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.05 23:25:00 - [1] Quote: 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 load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. so its a little over a month since this was posted in a dev blog Linkage whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ?
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.08.05 23:26:00 - [2] 2012 most likely. _ Akita T USEFUL EVE LINKS collection
Doublewhopper	Posted - 2011.08.05 23:43:00 - [3] They are working on it...be patient...they have so many things to do... First they will reintroduce ship trails Then they will reintroduce the old cyno effect Then they will reintroduce a decent relationship to their customers (and get rid of NEX and Aurum) Then they will reintroduce ship spinning Then i will reintroduce myself into the game and activate my subscriptions again
Trig Onami Caldari Onami Corporation	Posted - 2011.08.06 00:01:00 - [4] The reason they took it away is because if you looked closely: Windows had this "shine" to them. When you spun your ship.. the shine travelled around the windows, based on the non-carbon-based lighting used on your ship in the old hangar. They have to basically start from scratch with the new lighting from carbon engine to re-implement this feature. EVE. The most ambitious project on earth.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 00:46:00 - [5] It's not coming back. Get over it. -------------------------------------------
Noddy Comet Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 00:46:00 - [6] Originally by: Smoking Blunts whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Please elaborate, exactly what function was removed with CQ? I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before.
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 00:58:00 - [7] Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 06/08/2011 00:58:05 Originally by: Noddy Comet Originally by: Smoking Blunts whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Please elaborate, exactly what function was removed with CQ? I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before. can you double click to open your cargo? can you drag a ship from the ship hanger into your screen and make it active? hows the ship spinning going? im looking at a door, that does way less than before
Jack Tronic	Posted - 2011.08.06 00:59:00 - [8] Edited by: Jack Tronic on 06/08/2011 00:59:44 Originally by: Noddy Comet Originally by: Smoking Blunts whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Please elaborate, exactly what function was removed with CQ? I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before. Double click to open cargo, right click on ship to open one of 20000 extra bays on a carrier or jump freighter or orca or dreadnought. Open drone bay easily without dealing with the lag fest known as fitting window. Idle eve without melting your gpu
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:00:00 - [9] Originally by: Noddy Comet I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before. You can't double-click anywhere to open your cargo hold. You cannot direcly and always access all of your ship menus by simply right-clicking the ship in front of you. You cannot activate a ship by dragging it out the hangar. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Noddy Comet Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:08:00 - [10] Edited by: Noddy Comet on 06/08/2011 01:09:00 Yeah, you're right, silly me, the only thing I can't do is drag a ship, but then again I'm not that lazy that I can't use alt-f or alt-n and then right click or double click away to do everything else. Spinning included.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:25:00 - [11] Edited by: Devai Starchild on 06/08/2011 01:27:21 Because right clicking on your ship hangar is hard. Or hell, clicking on one of the two seperate CQ buttons for the cargo hold. -------------------------------------------
Imco Rendere	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:37:00 - [12] Originally by: Akita T 2012 most likely. 2112 you mean ! ..... we are the priests, of the temples of syrinx .........
Ejit Amarr STD contractors	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:43:00 - [13] Oh dear it's the weekend is it. CCP alts come out to play! At the end of the day, the majority hates "Door" and wants the more functional old hanger back. Myself included!
Windjammer Gallente	Posted - 2011.08.06 01:52:00 - [14] CCPÆs thinking is that if they delay long enough, people will become accustomed to the CQ and at least some may prefer to stick with the CQ rather than switch back to the more functional ôship spinö hanger. The delay will also allow CCP to hopefully code in functionality that was lost when they switched to the CQ model. In CCPÆs defense and in addition to the above, the CSM evidently presented the ôship spinö hanger as an emotional issue rather than as an issue with functionality. An emotional argument is weaker than an argument for function since emotions can be expected to fade with time. In addition to better functionality and better computer resource usage the ôship spinö hanger also allowed a better view of the ship. Apparently the CSM didnÆt argue that either. -Windjammer
Windjammer Gallente	Posted - 2011.08.06 04:04:00 - [15] Hangar, not hanger. I'm so embarassed.
Uuali	Posted - 2011.08.06 04:04:00 - [16] Wait, wait, wait. WAIT! Keep paying while you wait. But keep waiting.
Windjammer Gallente	Posted - 2011.08.06 04:07:00 - [17] Originally by: Uuali Wait, wait, wait. WAIT! Keep paying while you wait. But keep waiting. I am, I am. IÆm waiting like crazyàààààààwaitàààà.what? Are you tricking me?
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2011.08.06 04:17:00 - [18] Originally by: Devai Starchild It's not coming back. Get over it. Another lie then. Np, just keeping track. -
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 09:37:00 - [19] Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 06/08/2011 09:38:45 Originally by: Devai Starchild Edited by: Devai Starchild on 06/08/2011 01:27:21 Because right clicking on your ship hangar is hard. Or hell, clicking on one of the two seperate CQ buttons for the cargo hold. the right clicking on the hangar is an option granted, but it takes way more clicks than the 2 it used to. click on ship tab, click on ship, scroll to cargo and click. lets hope you didnt click drone bay, ore hangar, fuel bay, show info or one of the many other none cargo options in that list. and forget about what happens in the CQ, id bet lots of peopel have that switched off the same as i, and look at THE DOOR
Flynn Fetladral Royal Order of Security Specialists	Posted - 2011.08.06 09:55:00 - [20] You really think that was going to happen inside of a month? If it comes out before the Winter Expansion, i'd be surprised. Follow Flynn on Twitter
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 10:46:00 - [21] Originally by: Flynn Fetladral You really think that was going to happen inside of a month? If it comes out before the Winter Expansion, i'd be surprised. no, but in a month id expect them to be able to give a rough idea of when it is coming back. i mean it is in the blog that its coming back
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.06 10:55:00 - [22] Originally by: Devai Starchild Because right clicking on your ship hangar is hard. No. Because removal of very quick shortcuts for no useful reason whatsoever is idiotic. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 12:32:00 - [23] There is a reason. A. You get an environment to live in now B. It is opening the path for station environments C. Right clicking on your ship in hangar is like one second slower than double click on your ship spinning As I said, it's an improvement. If your computer can't handle it, you detest better graphics and you bemoan the fact that you can only look at "the door" then the answer is not to whine until they return to an old static environment because they aren't. The answer is to improve your computer or get over it. -------------------------------------------
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.06 12:36:00 - [24] Edited by: Tippia on 06/08/2011 12:37:38 Originally by: Devai Starchild A. You get an environment to live in now Not a reason to remove the functionality. Quote: B. It is opening the path for station environments Does not require a removal a functionality. Quote: C. Right clicking on your ship in hangar is like one second slower than double click on your ship spinning àstill removes functionality. So still for no useful reason. Quote: the answer is not to whine until they return to an old static environment because they aren't. Actually, it is, because they are. Not that it matters because the environment is not the important bit ù the lost functionality is, and there's no telling if they're actually bringing that back of if they will keep it removed for no useful reason. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 14:18:00 - [25] Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 06/08/2011 14:18:56 Originally by: Devai Starchild There is a reason. A. You get an environment to live in now B. It is opening the path for station environments C. Right clicking on your ship in hangar is like one second slower than double click on your ship spinning As I said, it's an improvement. If your computer can't handle it, you detest better graphics and you bemoan the fact that you can only look at "the door" then the answer is not to whine until they return to an old static environment because they aren't. The answer is to improve your computer or get over it. its not that most peoples pc's cant handle it, mine does well with 1, 2 or even 3 clients in cq running. its the loss in basic functionality. i want dock as quickly as before, unload my cargo as quickly as before, and undock as quickly as before. can i do that currently? no. not even with cq turned off can it come close to as fast as before. thats whats been lost, and its been lost for no good reason
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 18:44:00 - [26] Again, this huge loss of functionality you speak of equates to you having to right click and then click instead of double clicking. It's a matter of having either an area that you can view your character and walk around that will eventually lead to larger areas with more characters or having to use one extra click. Completely worth it and yes, a valid reason. -------------------------------------------
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.06 18:48:00 - [27] Originally by: Devai Starchild It's a matter of having either an area that you can view your character and walk around that will eventually lead to larger areas with more characters or having to use one extra click. àwhich is not reason enough to remove functionality because that functionality could easily be maintained even with that area in the game. It's not a valid reason to remove it because there is nothing in the CQ that in any way whatsoever requires the functionality to be removed. So no, not even close to valid. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.08.06 18:55:00 - [28] Originally by: Devai Starchild Again, this huge loss of functionality you speak of equates to you having to right click and then click instead of double clicking. It's a matter of having either an area that you can view your character and walk around that will eventually lead to larger areas with more characters or having to use one extra click. Completely worth it and yes, a valid reason. still no valid reason to why CCP didn't put a button above the undock, saying "ENTERING CQ", thus making the incarna content optional, like we were promised oh I don't know, 5 years ago? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 19:15:00 - [29] Originally by: Tippia àwhich is not reason enough to remove functionality because that functionality could easily be maintained even with that area in the game. It's not a valid reason to remove it because there is nothing in the CQ that in any way whatsoever requires the functionality to be removed. Nothing except for the fact that your ship is not directly in front of you when you enter the station now? Or are you now complaining you cannot double click your ship in the CQ and open the hanger? Well allow me to enlighten you but there is a button right below your ship in front of you that you can single click. That's right... you can access your hangar with one LESS click. Yep, they ADDED functionality because now it's a single click instead of a double. Originally by: Grimpak still no valid reason to why CCP didn't put a button above the undock, saying "ENTERING CQ", thus making the incarna content optional, like we were promised oh I don't know, 5 years ago? Because it is not optional. Its similar to being able to disable space. The only reason they allow you to disable it now is because some graphics cards can't handle it. When it is optimized, you won't have that option. -------------------------------------------
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 19:24:00 - [30] Originally by: Devai Starchild Because it is not optional. Its similar to being able to disable space. The only reason they allow you to disable it now is because some graphics cards can't handle it. When it is optimized, you won't have that option. but we should have that option and was spouted by ccp as an option. but that being beside the point. when do we get the restored functionality back that was promised in that blog of over a month ago. id just like a rough guide. 1 expansion, 2 expansion. 18 months even. just an idea. do you have an idea when devai?
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.06 19:39:00 - [31] Edited by: Devai Starchild on 06/08/2011 19:40:18 Originally by: Smoking Blunts but we should have that option and was spouted by ccp as an option. but that being beside the point. when do we get the restored functionality back that was promised in that blog of over a month ago. id just like a rough guide. 1 expansion, 2 expansion. 18 months even. just an idea. do you have an idea when devai? When do you get the option to double click your ship to open cargo instead of single click or right click and click? Probably never, though they might add the option to double click the ship floating in the CQ to open cargo. When do you get "ship spinning" back instead of a feature they put thousands of dollars into, that was requested many times, and have put large plans on expanding upon? Never. -------------------------------------------
eulkahn Amarr	Posted - 2011.08.06 19:47:00 - [32] Edited by: eulkahn on 06/08/2011 19:47:12 edit ^beat me to the punch a bit^ Some people need to get a bit of a clue, they've spent a lot of money developing CQ, they're going to spend a lot more. It's delusional to think they're going to ditch it and give you back the old hangar. If that's enough reason to quit the game for you then that's not good but unfortunately it's just tough on you, deal with it or move on. I honestly don't mean that dismissively, I've quit MMO's for less, but you really do have to face up to the change one way or the other. They CAN reintroduce some of the features: easier ways to get at your cargo/drones, drag and drop ships, maybe less GPU-intensive graphics (though I wouldn't hold your breath on that one), and some form of ship spinning. And hopefully they will, but I'd lay money you'll *never* get an option to disable CQ altogether, it's going to be the default from here on out, I expect they'll introduce a 'board ship' option once you're in CQ so you can spin it, though that will of course involve remodeling the interior of all the stations to show the CQ balcony. If, as is CCP's stated intention, they continue to develop CQ into an extended multiplayer station environment, there is no way they're going to let you opt out of that, not to hammer the point too hard but: deal with it, or move on.
Alxea	Posted - 2011.08.06 19:51:00 - [33] Originally by: Smoking Blunts Quote: 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 load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. so its a little over a month since this was posted in a dev blog Linkage whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Upgrading your videocard from a piece of sheat $10 made 6 years ago to a $150 videocard of this generation made in the last 2 years gives you 70/80 FPS in CQ on max settings. You lost functionality to play any modern game that has came out since crysis with your crap hardware. Get over yourself troll. Not CCP's fault you have outdated hardware. Its bloody DX9 for crying out loud mate. Your way behind the times if you really think CQ is that GPU intensive. Only on your hardware mate.
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.06 20:37:00 - [34] Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 06/08/2011 20:37:48 Originally by: Alxea Originally by: Smoking Blunts Quote: 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 load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. so its a little over a month since this was posted in a dev blog Linkage whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Upgrading your videocard from a piece of sheat $10 made 6 years ago to a $150 videocard of this generation made in the last 2 years gives you 70/80 FPS in CQ on max settings. You lost functionality to play any modern game that has came out since crysis with your crap hardware. Get over yourself troll. Not CCP's fault you have outdated hardware. Its bloody DX9 for crying out loud mate. Your way behind the times if you really think CQ is that GPU intensive. Only on your hardware mate. as you didnt read. ill say again. my pc is fine with up to 3 clients running cq. ok its a little warmer than before with just 3 clients running, but thats to be expected. you need to learn to read
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.06 23:05:00 - [35] Edited by: Tippia on 06/08/2011 23:06:41 Originally by: Devai Starchild Nothing except for the fact that your ship is not directly in front of you when you enter the station now? No, not even that, because having your ship in front of you is not a prerequisite for this functionality and even if there might be some overlaps, that's still not reason enough since it could be provided while in the door view. But ok, I worded that improperly: three's nothing in the addition of the CQ that in any way requires the functionality to be removed. Quote: Because it is not optional. Yes it is. You can turn it off, but that does not restore the functionality ù again, for no good reason whatsoever. Not only is it optional, but there is absolutely no reason not to keep it optional except idiotic pride on CCP's part. It is simply not required. Originally by: eulkahn they've spent a lot of money developing CQ, they're going to spend a lot more. It's delusional to think they're going to ditch it and give you back the old hangar. Why says anything about ditching it? It's a matter of providing options and not removing functionality for no good reason. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.08.06 23:59:00 - [36] Originally by: Devai Starchild Originally by: Grimpak still no valid reason to why CCP didn't put a button above the undock, saying "ENTERING CQ", thus making the incarna content optional, like we were promised oh I don't know, 5 years ago? Because it is not optional. Its similar to being able to disable space. The only reason they allow you to disable it now is because some graphics cards can't handle it. When it is optimized, you won't have that option. still doesn't explain the change from "INCARNA IS OPTIONAL PEEPS!" to "OH HEY, WE'RE ADDING A TEMPORARY OPTION TO TURN OFF INCARNA! IT'S ONLY TEMPORARY THO!" --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Kolya Medz Gallente PyroStorm Enforcers STR8NGE BREW	Posted - 2011.08.07 00:06:00 - [37] Station spinning needs to be returned. This is a sig.
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.07 05:33:00 - [38] Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 07/08/2011 05:35:10 Originally by: eulkahn It's delusional to think they're going to ditch it and give you back the old hangar. Jesus wept, who's been asking for that? I want what CCP said we would have - CQ/WiS as an option from Hangar view, perhaps with an option to make CQ default if desired. This move to CQ as default station view is some late decision that was just very, very bad. Presumably it was partly "let's get them used to being avatars" and partly "let's shove NeX in their faces". Neither is really a sufficient reason to remove a functioning aspect of the game that nearly everyone was used to, fluid with, and enjoyed. Control was ingrained, and people were immersed. Psychologically, Hangar view was "home". Over time, CQ/WiS might have felt like home for a substantial number of players, and of course new players. But getting rid of the old "home" has made an at-present-unknown-but-obviously-not-negligible number of people feel "homeless" - i.e. it has pulled them out of immersion in EVE. Which is bathetically, ludicrously, the total opposite of the desired effect. ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
M'ktakh	Posted - 2011.08.07 09:21:00 - [39] Constant decanting also goes against the lore and against logic, and also misses the opportunity to add another layer of skillsinks and interaction. I, being the space-faring demi-god casually tossing aside thousands of lives each day that I am, do not need to leave my cozy little pod every time I want to restock ammo, or comlink the agent that the current batch of pirates is no more. However, going to the bar to buy drugs, to play some game I remember from an early trailer, and so on, is a reason for me to leave. You could, hell, should also add skillset for this interaction, reducing either the cost, or increasing influence or something. As for ship spinning, yes, that is a huuge loss of functionality. But it could be given back rather easily by having a "docked with ship XYZ" on top of the screen that could be clicked on in the same way as the old hangar/spin view could.
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2011.08.07 09:43:00 - [40] Originally by: M'ktakh Constant decanting also goes against the lore and against logic, and also misses the opportunity to add another layer of skillsinks and interaction. Absolutely. Mandatory CQ on every docking was CCP throwing years of their established lore and world building out the window. All so they could have more people look at the useless **** in the NEX store.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 09:51:00 - [41] Originally by: eulkahn Some people need to get a bit of a clue, they've spent a lot of money developing CQ, they're going to spend a lot more. It's delusional to think they're going to ditch it and give you back the old hangar. Some others also need a clue, because that's not what we are asking for. We simply want to choose when we disembark and not be forced into the CQ, it's totally unnecessary and breaks immersion. Originally by: eulkahn I honestly don't mean that dismissively.. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Cyra Mangeiri Minmatar	Posted - 2011.08.07 10:10:00 - [42] I'm curious how some of you people ever managed to figure the game out, when you insist opening cargo with double click is gone. Yes, you'll need to have your ships window open, then just double click on the ship you want to open (it doesn't even need to be an active one, imagine that). So it's one click more if your ships window isn't on top when you land in the station. Tears, delicious.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 10:12:00 - [43] Originally by: Cyra Mangeiri I'm curious how some of you people ever managed to figure the game out, when you insist opening cargo with double click is gone. Yes, you'll need to have your ships window open, then just double click on the ship you want to open (it doesn't even need to be an active one, imagine that). So it's one click more if your ships window isn't on top when you land in the station. Tears, delicious. I'm curious how you get through life, with your terrible reading and comprehension skills. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.08.07 10:42:00 - [44] Originally by: Cyra Mangeiri I'm curious how some of you people ever managed to figure the game out, when you insist opening cargo with double click is gone. Yes, you'll need to have your ships window open, then just double click on the ship you want to open (it doesn't even need to be an active one, imagine that). So it's one click more if your ships window isn't on top when you land in the station. Tears, delicious. I think you missed the point here. you missed it as much as a blind man misses a shot with a sawed-off shotgun on a bird that is flying above 2000m high. and he hit his foot instead. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 11:42:00 - [45] No, they got the point. You guys are just too busy crying over an improvement to the game to notice. -------------------------------------------
Asuri Kinnes Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated	Posted - 2011.08.07 11:56:00 - [46] Edited by: Asuri Kinnes on 07/08/2011 11:59:10 Originally by: Devai Starchild Edited by: Devai Starchild on 06/08/2011 01:27:21 Because right clicking on your ship hangar is hard. Or hell, clicking on one of the two seperate CQ buttons for the cargo hold. Because including a button to decant to Incarna is so hard... Actually, if they had left the original hangar, and just included a button to decant, that probably would have been less work... Originally by: Devai Starchild No, they got the point. You guys are just too busy crying over an improvement to the game to notice. Go back to 2nd life, they did it first... Actually, Incarna has "improved" nothing in the game, and annoyed a lot of people, for no good reason. Wormholes: The NEW end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs. NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA!
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:01:00 - [47] Originally by: Devai Starchild You guys are just too busy crying over an improvement to the game to notice. Removal of functionality is not an improvement. Removal of functionality for no useful reason is downright stupid. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Deviana Sevidon Gallente Panta-Rhei Butterfly Effect Alliance	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:20:00 - [48] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Devai Starchild You guys are just too busy crying over an improvement to the game to notice. Removal of functionality is not an improvement. Removal of functionality for no useful reason is downright stupid. But the point is, there was no functionality removed. All functions can be accessed via the same interface as before, even ship spinning is there but in a different way then before. So what you are really crying about is, that you don't want any changes. Please don't forget to contract me your stuff before you ragequit. Quote: Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:31:00 - [49] Originally by: Deviana Sevidon But the point is, there was no functionality removed. àaside from the ones listed in this thread. It's a loss of functionality in the same way as if the HUD buttons were removed. Quote: All functions can be accessed via the same interface as before à~~shortcuts~~ long ways around that already existed, but which are now required instead of the handy shortcuts that were removed for no good reason. Quote: So what you are really crying about is, that you don't want any changes. No, the crying is about the unnecessary removal of functionality, forcing the use of equally unnecessary work-arounds, that happened for no good reason. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:41:00 - [50] Originally by: Deviana Sevidon So what you are really crying about is, that you don't want any changes. Yet another that seemingly cannot read or comprehend. WE WANT Incarna, WE WANT to walk in stations, but we want what was promised by CCP, choice. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Deviana Sevidon Gallente Panta-Rhei Butterfly Effect Alliance	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:46:00 - [51] That is it? Some removed keyboard shortcuts, removed functionality? You can access the old menu with a few clicks of the mouse, usually only with a single click and it will take you between 1-2 seconds for a click. I must say that removed functionality, is only a strawman argument of people who try to resist change. There was an old saying on these boards that is almost forgotten now: Adapt, or die! Quote: Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 12:52:00 - [52] Edited by: Tippia on 07/08/2011 12:56:02 Originally by: Deviana Sevidon That is it? Some removed keyboard shortcuts, removed functionality? Since, again, it happened for no good reason whatsoever, yes. And since it happened contrary of previous statements that it wouldn't, doubly so. Quote: I must say that removed functionality, is only a strawman argument of people who try to resist change. No, that is not a straw man. What you just did is a straw man: ignoring what people say, replacing it with your own (false and irrelevant) "resistant to change" spiel, and going after that argument instead. By the way, even if it was about resistance to change, why is that so bad? Where does this moronic idea that change is always good come from? If we removed all fighting in the game and instead had people work out their differences through pogo races around the new Incarna food court, would that also be good ù it's a change after all ù and would people who called the devs out for being complete idiots also just be a bunch of whiners whose only motivation is resistance to change? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.08.07 13:03:00 - [53] Originally by: Devai Starchild No, they got the point. You guys are just too busy crying over an improvement to the game to notice. you still missed the point, and still by the same distance. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Deviana Sevidon Gallente Panta-Rhei Butterfly Effect Alliance	Posted - 2011.08.07 13:09:00 - [54] You are still talking about some keyboard shortcuts no one cared about before incarna came, or the ship spinning that was one of the more boring things to do? Wake up, the sky is not falling, EVE has not become the happy wonderland where everyone is holding hands and singing together. You can still PvP all you want. You can still access the same old menus from station. Since you try to contruct the removed shortcuts to call out the devs as idiots, I would say that you lost any credibility to talk about the issue. Quote: Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 13:12:00 - [55] Originally by: Deviana Sevidon You are still talking about some keyboard shortcuts no one cared about before incarna came No. We are still talking about some mouse shortcuts that people used before Incarna came along and removed them for no useful reason. Quote: Since you try to contruct the removed shortcuts to call out the devs as idiots, I would say that you lost any credibility to talk about the issue. And since you have such problem understanding what the issue actually is, you are not qualified to talk about it or about the credibility of those who do. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Sandrestal	Posted - 2011.08.07 13:16:00 - [56] Originally by: Devai Starchild When do you get "ship spinning" back instead of a feature they put thousands of dollars into, that was requested many times, and have put large plans on expanding upon? Ummm...just who requested the feature "Cq"
Because Of Door	Posted - 2011.08.07 13:48:00 - [57] Really, I'm sick of staring at a door... In the middle of a fight, I may need to re-ship or ship-up, with CQ on it takes enough time to load the CQ for me to make a "cup-of-space-tea" (about 1 minute and 13 seconds), once loaded I have to wait out my session timer, then to change ships, and then undock. With it off I can dock, stare at a door for 30 seconds then switch ships and undock. However............. When I have CQ turned off, and with it on - if I am not actively looking at the ship in the hangar or on my sofa - it is not obvious what ship I am flying at any given moment without looking at the ships tab/window and even then it is not exactly clear (an extra border-line does not make it clearly identifiable), especially if you have 40 or more ships in your hangar each with different fittings. Alternatively I have to open the fitting window all the time. Right-clicking on the ship in the list is a pain when you have several cargo bays (orca, carrier, and so on) and the current amount of in-station lag means whenever I transfer just one item to my cargo hold I then have to wait 2-5 seconds for the item list to sort itself out before I can do anything again. This is the best summary of this fiasco I have read so far.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 14:05:00 - [58] Originally by: Devai Starchild Never. Someone has double standards. What's good for the goose. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.08.07 16:26:00 - [59] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Devai Starchild Never. Someone has double standards. What's good for the goose. /facepalm --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 17:27:00 - [60] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Devai Starchild Never. Someone has double standards. What's good for the goose. Talk about reading comprehension. That is a completely separate issue that has zero bearing on this discussion. -------------------------------------------
Fredfredbug4	Posted - 2011.08.07 17:34:00 - [61] Originally by: Doublewhopper They are working on it...be patient...they have so many things to do... First they will reintroduce ship trails Then they will reintroduce the old cyno effect Then they will reintroduce a decent relationship to their customers (and get rid of NEX and Aurum) Then they will reintroduce ship spinning Then i will reintroduce myself into the game and activate my subscriptions again So three out of the four reasons why you aren't playing are purely cosmetic?
Omniwing	Posted - 2011.08.07 17:44:00 - [62] Wow. Listen very carefully to me people. Here are the facts. I've played a lot of EvE. Docking, refitting and undocking happen to be something that you do a lot in EvE. Typically, your downtime in EvE is also spent docked. Two points to be made here. First, and most importantly, The time and effort it takes to dock, refit, change cargo, etc. has been increased without hangar view. To those of you who are like 'blah blah its one more mouse click stop whining" HEY, have you ever played a VIDEO game before? This is SERIOUS ELITE business. Is two extra clicks, and 5-10 extra seconds a big deal? HELL YES ITS A BIG DEAL! That would be like saying "Only lazy people group their weapons, its just as easy to click my HUD 7 times". Guess what. No it isn't. It takes time and effort. Secondly, I can run the CQ, but I don't. You know why? Because if it loads my fitting screen even .5% slower than it did before, (which it does), then it is a tactical disadvantage. I thought we were all elitists here in this game! What if I want to alt tab and play a 2nd game while I'm docked up with 3 clients open? So, I'm going to use the door because tactical advantage and time efficiency are infinitely more important to me than eye candy. TL;DR Incarna is eye candy. I don't need eye candy. I am forced to give up tactical advantages(NO MATTER HOW "SMALL" YOU PERCEIVE THEM TO BE) for said eye candy.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 18:02:00 - [63] No, one click is not a big deal. Especially not when you take into consideration the amount of time CCP would have to invest to add an old hangar functionality. If you are so "elite" that 0.0125sec of time to load a screen or one extra click in a situation where you are perfectly safe bothers you then you take yourself too seriously. I mean for real, a slight increase in network lag while undocking (or pausing to scratch your nose) equals more time than this "loss of functionality" would save. This thread is nothing more than people grasping at even the tiniest straws to complain about. -------------------------------------------
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 18:04:00 - [64] Edited by: Tippia on 07/08/2011 18:08:41 Originally by: Devai Starchild No, one click is not a big deal. Especially not when you take into consideration the amount of time CCP would have to invest to add an old hangar functionality. àand how much is that, praytell? How much problem is it to add something that already exists and which the game already fully supports? Oh, and btwà why are you so against such a small change? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.07 18:14:00 - [65] Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 07/08/2011 18:14:16 Originally by: Devai Starchild Allow players that are within docking range of a station to open their item hangar just like any other container. This will make accessing your goods, trading, etc faster because you can then bypass two loading screens. id also like to bypass loading of cq when docking to access goods or trade. maybe they could just add a button that would lead from the old hanger to the wonderful cq. think they mentioned doing that before. no need to spend extra man power on that. old hanger, button, new cq.
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 18:33:00 - [66] Originally by: Devai Starchild Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Devai Starchild Never. Someone has double standards. What's good for the goose. Talk about reading comprehension. That is a completely separate issue that has zero bearing on this discussion. Au contraire. You want functionality regarding the hanger, we just want the return of existing functionality regarding the hanger and neither of us want to load CQ to get it. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 18:45:00 - [67] Originally by: Smoking Blunts Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 07/08/2011 18:14:16 Originally by: Devai Starchild Allow players that are within docking range of a station to open their item hangar just like any other container. This will make accessing your goods, trading, etc faster because you can then bypass two loading screens. id also like to bypass loading of cq when docking to access goods or trade. maybe they could just add a button that would lead from the old hanger to the wonderful cq. think they mentioned doing that before. no need to spend extra man power on that. old hanger, button, new cq. It isn't as simple as adding a button to switch between hangars, though. That is the problem. They have implemented a whole new engine when docking into the station and now they would have to integrate that old engine with their new one, which is no small feat. It also wouldn't fit seamlessly because the old hangar's backgrounds do not match the ones in the CQ so they would need to build a "generic" background in the old engine to match the CQs. Since from what I have read the current CQ is the minmatar one then if the racial CQs do not match the old engine's environments then they would need to make new ones of that to match those. I would assume it would be easier to just keep the CARBON engine and just have it load the same CQ but the camera would move to outside and above the ship to a view similar to how the old hangar looked. It wouldn't be the old hangar, but it might look very similar. You would have a view above your ship and you would see your character down below on the docking platform. Then there would be a button that would "fly" the camera back down to your character. The only problem with that is that I am sure it is not rendering some of the environment that is not currently visible from the character's POV on the platform. That would require it to render more and possibly be even slower to load and provide a bigger strain on GPUs. -------------------------------------------
Hakaru Ishiwara Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2011.08.07 19:00:00 - [68] Originally by: Uuali Wait, wait, wait. WAIT! Keep paying while you wait. But keep waiting. Isn't that the truth. There are some enticing IPs coming up for release later this year and CCP's "just keep paying your fees while we release **** and beta test our other IPs' code on paying customers" game plan continues to crack and crumble.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 19:12:00 - [69] Edited by: Devai Starchild on 07/08/2011 19:13:15 Originally by: Hakaru Ishiwara Originally by: Uuali Wait, wait, wait. WAIT! Keep paying while you wait. But keep waiting. Isn't that the truth. There are some enticing IPs coming up for release later this year and CCP's "just keep paying your fees while we release **** and beta test our other IPs' code on paying customers" game plan continues to crack and crumble. I agree with this, though I don't agree with the crack and crumble. CCP will probably be successful with this because enough players have a large enough stake with EVE that they will continue to play no matter how they view the company. Ultimately I feel they are not being honest here. I would be very surprised if they actually had plans to implement the old hangar instead of make it so everyone will use the CQ. Which they should be upfront in telling people instead of saying "Soon" in the hopes that they will just get over it. That was ultimately my response in this thread because I think players will be better to realize this and make their decisions. The only options are really either to accept it or quit because all CCP is going to do is damage control to give players hope so they don't cancel their sub while waiting for people to get used to it, accept it, or get over it so they can move on with their company plans. Something with so small a gameplay effect as the CQ is not enough for (most) people to quit over. I will say, though, that selling balance affecting items for real money is, though. I only bring that up because it is, what I feel, the only real danger that has come to light during Incarna to the game. ...aaand that was way more bloggy and ranty than I meant and for that I apologize. -------------------------------------------
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.07 19:25:00 - [70] Originally by: Devai Starchild Originally by: Smoking Blunts Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 07/08/2011 18:14:16 Originally by: Devai Starchild Allow players that are within docking range of a station to open their item hangar just like any other container. This will make accessing your goods, trading, etc faster because you can then bypass two loading screens. id also like to bypass loading of cq when docking to access goods or trade. maybe they could just add a button that would lead from the old hanger to the wonderful cq. think they mentioned doing that before. no need to spend extra man power on that. old hanger, button, new cq. It isn't as simple as adding a button to switch between hangars, though. That is the problem. They have implemented a whole new engine when docking into the station and now they would have to integrate that old engine with their new one, which is no small feat. It also wouldn't fit seamlessly because the old hangar's backgrounds do not match the ones in the CQ so they would need to build a "generic" background in the old engine to match the CQs. Since from what I have read the current CQ is the minmatar one then if the racial CQs do not match the old engine's environments then they would need to make new ones of that to match those. I would assume it would be easier to just keep the CARBON engine and just have it load the same CQ but the camera would move to outside and above the ship to a view similar to how the old hangar looked. It wouldn't be the old hangar, but it might look very similar. You would have a view above your ship and you would see your character down below on the docking platform. Then there would be a button that would "fly" the camera back down to your character. The only problem with that is that I am sure it is not rendering some of the environment that is not currently visible from the character's POV on the platform. That would require it to render more and possibly be even slower to load and provide a bigger strain on GPUs. surely they coudl unimplement the new engine, give us a button in the old engine that would start the new engine, with maybe a laoding screen, simlar to the one we have now. i couldnt give a crap if the back grounds are slightly diffent between the hanger view and cq view. i would like fast loading, a hanger that works not a door and the option to decant from my pod if i so choose. exactly like they said they would
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 19:34:00 - [71] Originally by: Devai Starchild Ultimately I feel they are not being honest here. I would be very surprised if they actually had plans to implement the old hangar instead of make it so everyone will use the CQ. They've already stated that they are going to recreate the hangar view. The question remains if they will also restore the functionality that was lost. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.07 19:59:00 - [72] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Devai Starchild Ultimately I feel they are not being honest here. They've already stated that they are going to recreate the hangar view. That's what they are being dishonest about -------------------------------------------
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.07 20:39:00 - [73] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Devai Starchild Ultimately I feel they are not being honest here. I would be very surprised if they actually had plans to implement the old hangar instead of make it so everyone will use the CQ. They've already stated that they are going to recreate the hangar view. The question remains if they will also restore the functionality that was lost. I must admit I was quite annoyed when that joint video came out after the meeting - they were stressing the "emotional" thing about ship spinning, and I was thinking "WTF?" I mean, sure, spinning was a teensy bit of an emotional loss, but it was nothing compared to having your gears constantly jammed as you tried to do things that were ingrained as habits. This makes me despair that CCP got the wrong end of the stick, and we'll have a purely cosmetic "ship spinning", which basically means nothing. It's odd, because I gather the CSM took your post over with them (along with some of the other cogent posts at the time) and your post clearly stated the issue as one of functionality. Grrr ... ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2011.08.07 20:44:00 - [74] Edited by: Mag''s on 07/08/2011 20:45:34 Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian It's odd, because I gather the CSM took your post over with them (along with some of the other cogent posts at the time) and your post clearly stated the issue as one of functionality. Grrr ... It only went to highlight how much of a joke the CSM are tbh. They went all that way, and basically came back with nothing. There wasn't one solid outcome of change from that meeting. Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience.
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.07 20:46:00 - [75] Originally by: Mag's Edited by: Mag''s on 07/08/2011 20:45:34 Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian It's odd, because I gather the CSM took your post over with them (along with some of the other cogent posts at the time) and your post clearly stated the issue as one of functionality. Grrr ... It only went to highlight how much of a joke the CSM are tbh. They went all that way, and basically came back with nothing. There wasn't one solid outcome of change from that meeting. Yeah, it looks like they were well and truly schmoozed. ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.07 20:59:00 - [76] Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian It's odd, because I gather the CSM took your post over with them (along with some of the other cogent posts at the time) and your post clearly stated the issue as one of functionality. Oh, I think they didà Just in those last 5 days of June, my response write-up got some 36k hits, including 500 from Iceland, and I know that the CSM were very well aware of it. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Forum Worrier	Posted - 2011.08.07 21:49:00 - [77] Lost functionality? Give me a break. Keyboard shortcuts available for the quickest way of performing those functions and multiple other ways as well. Side menu, ship hangar, hologram. From CCP's point of view it's obviously an emotional issue since no functionality was lost. Idlers cant sit in hangar and spin their ships while chatting to corpies. Quote: Just in those last 5 days of June, my response write-up got some 36k hits, including 500 from Iceland, and I know that the CSM were very well aware of it. Wow, assuming those were all unique hits, less than 1 in 10 players give a damn about what you had to say. Continue your crusade for ship spinning though, I'm truly thankful you're all forcing CCP to task resources to fix this game breaking situation.
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 00:39:00 - [78] Originally by: Forum Worrier Continue your crusade for ship spinning Ah, the voice of ignorance is once again raised in a futile attempt to make itself sound important. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Brusanan Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance	Posted - 2011.08.08 01:15:00 - [79] Edited by: Brusanan on 08/08/2011 01:15:06 The thing that bugs me the most is that I can't see what ship I am in without having my ships window open. That is annoying. And anyone here who is arguing that making things more tedious and time consuming for no apparent reason isn't a bad thing is just ******ed. Incarna added no useful features, and removed a bunch of features that players loved and even relied on. The only useful feature of Incarna is the static door image that most players see while docked. ______
Powie XIII	Posted - 2011.08.08 02:55:00 - [80] Originally by: Devai Starchild Originally by: Smoking Blunts Edited by: Smoking Blunts on 07/08/2011 18:14:16 Originally by: Devai Starchild Allow players that are within docking range of a station to open their item hangar just like any other container. This will make accessing your goods, trading, etc faster because you can then bypass two loading screens. id also like to bypass loading of cq when docking to access goods or trade. maybe they could just add a button that would lead from the old hanger to the wonderful cq. think they mentioned doing that before. no need to spend extra man power on that. old hanger, button, new cq. It isn't as simple as adding a button to switch between hangars, though. That is the problem. They have implemented a whole new engine when docking into the station and now they would have to integrate that old engine with their new one, which is no small feat. It also wouldn't fit seamlessly because the old hangar's backgrounds do not match the ones in the CQ so they would need to build a "generic" background in the old engine to match the CQs. Since from what I have read the current CQ is the minmatar one then if the racial CQs do not match the old engine's environments then they would need to make new ones of that to match those. I would assume it would be easier to just keep the CARBON engine and just have it load the same CQ but the camera would move to outside and above the ship to a view similar to how the old hangar looked. It wouldn't be the old hangar, but it might look very similar. You would have a view above your ship and you would see your character down below on the docking platform. Then there would be a button that would "fly" the camera back down to your character. The only problem with that is that I am sure it is not rendering some of the environment that is not currently visible from the character's POV on the platform. That would require it to render more and possibly be even slower to load and provide a bigger strain on GPUs. The more you talk, the more you sound like having a CCP lovefest, or worst a CCP alt.
Devai Starchild Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.08 03:07:00 - [81] Originally by: Powie XIII The more you talk, the more you sound like having a CCP lovefest, or worst a CCP alt. YES, because anyone who actually likes a feature must be a CCP alt. If I had to troll you whiny *****es to get paid, I'd probably kill myself. As it stands, I just do this for fun. -------------------------------------------
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2011.08.08 03:12:00 - [82] Originally by: Ejit Oh dear it's the weekend is it. CCP alts come out to play! At the end of the day, the majority hates "Door" and wants the more functional old hanger back. Myself included! same.
Powie XIII	Posted - 2011.08.08 03:23:00 - [83] Edited by: Powie XIII on 08/08/2011 03:23:36 Originally by: Devai Starchild Originally by: Powie XIII The more you talk, the more you sound like having a CCP lovefest, or worst a CCP alt. YES, because anyone who actually likes a feature must be a CCP alt. If I had to troll you whiny *****es to get paid, I'd probably kill myself. As it stands, I just do this for fun. Liking an EvE Feature makes a person a CCP alt? Lets see, I like exploration, I like the Block function on EvE chat. And a bunch more features taht eve gives players. Does that make me a CCP alt? I don't think so. It's the way you defend CCP's CQ Feature. You certainly don't sound like your having fun, more like you are actually frustrated, angry even. And saying that YOU don't want to get paid to troll us, you certainly sound like you don't want to be branded a CCP alt.
ColdCutz Gallente Pwny Nation	Posted - 2011.08.08 04:09:00 - [84] Edited by: ColdCutz on 08/08/2011 04:11:12 Originally by: Forum Worrier Lost functionality? Give me a break. Keyboard shortcuts available for the quickest way of performing those functions and multiple other ways as well. Side menu, ship hangar, hologram. From CCP's point of view it's obviously an emotional issue since no functionality was lost. Idlers cant sit in hangar and spin their ships while chatting to corpies. Quote: Just in those last 5 days of June, my response write-up got some 36k hits, including 500 from Iceland, and I know that the CSM were very well aware of it. Wow, assuming those were all unique hits, less than 1 in 10 players give a damn about what you had to say. Continue your crusade for ship spinning though, I'm truly thankful you're all forcing CCP to task resources to fix this game breaking situation. Lot of smack coming from a forum alt created today just so you could whimper in anonymity. Honestly you all care way too much about rebuking other players for wanting the hangar view back when it won't even ***** affect you. You like hopping out of your pod straight into CQ? Great. Sit down on the sofa, watch some EVE trailers and stfu. Originally by:** Devai Starchild YES, because anyone who actually likes a feature must be a CCP alt. If I had to troll you whiny ***es to get paid, I'd probably kill myself. As it stands, I just do this for fun. If you had any *** you'd post with your main. Your entire counter-arguement and others like you is based entirely on your mere opinion that seconds don't matter in EVE, as if it makes you some kind of badass hardcore vet telling others to get a clue. If this opposition is all for your entertainment you need to grow up.
Simetraz	Posted - 2011.08.08 04:55:00 - [85] Keep your ship selection window open. It stays open and doesn't take up the whole screen like the fitting window does. If you tuck it in a corner you can right click your ship and get everything you need there. Works for me
Alissa Solette	Posted - 2011.08.08 08:29:00 - [86] 18 months. Giving us back the functionality that was patched out on purpose with crap CQ is difficult you know. Making it optional from the start would have been equally difficult. Oh wait.
Motoko Ku5anagi	Posted - 2011.08.08 12:30:00 - [87] Edited by: Motoko Ku5anagi on 08/08/2011 12:30:47 Originally by: Simetraz Keep your ship selection window open. It stays open and doesn't take up the whole screen like the fitting window does. If you tuck it in a corner you can right click your ship and get everything you need there. Works for me You can also choose 'Merge ship hanger into Station Services' in the General Settings. I'm sure this will get 'But now I can't see who's docked without one more click!', but oh well...
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.08 12:45:00 - [88] Originally by: Motoko Ku5anagi Edited by: Motoko Ku5anagi on 08/08/2011 12:30:47 Originally by: Simetraz Keep your ship selection window open. It stays open and doesn't take up the whole screen like the fitting window does. If you tuck it in a corner you can right click your ship and get everything you need there. Works for me You can also choose 'Merge ship hanger into Station Services' in the General Settings. I'm sure this will get 'But now I can't see who's docked without one more click!', but oh well... never tried that, so thanks for the tip. didnt much like having to scroll down over 50 ships and 319 items in a 2 inch wide box. so like cq i disabled it pretty fast.
Miss Rabblt	Posted - 2011.08.08 13:55:00 - [89] Originally by: Smoking Blunts Originally by: Devai Starchild Because right clicking on your ship hangar is hard. Or hell, clicking on one of the two seperate CQ buttons for the cargo hold. the right clicking on the hangar is an option granted, but it takes way more clicks than the 2 it used to. click on ship tab, click on ship, scroll to cargo and click. lets hope you didnt click drone bay, ore hangar, fuel bay, show info or one of the many other none cargo options in that list. have you ever heard about keyboard shortcuts? Trust me it is really useful! 1 minute of work (well 1 hour for you) to setup and now... It simply works!
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 14:06:00 - [90] Edited by: Tippia on 08/08/2011 14:06:37 Originally by: Miss Rabblt have you ever heard about keyboard shortcuts? Trust me it is really useful! 1 minute of work (well 1 hour for you) to setup and now... It simply works! àand the existence of work-arounds doesn't remove the fact that functionality was removed for no good reason. In fact, the need for them only further highlights the point. I take it that none of you "lol nothing is lost" people would mind even a bit if the HUD was removed in space? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Miss Rabblt	Posted - 2011.08.08 14:39:00 - [91] Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 08/08/2011 14:06:37 Originally by: Miss Rabblt have you ever heard about keyboard shortcuts? Trust me it is really useful! 1 minute of work (well 1 hour for you) to setup and now... It simply works! àand the existence of work-arounds doesn't remove the fact that functionality was removed for no good reason. In fact, the need for them only further highlights the point. well. this is life. Everything is changing time by time. Once Microsoft disabled direct access to PC resources in Windows. And it was really nice and useful feature! A lot of nice looking games and other software was made around direct control of videocard.... And now. You use something other. I hope you don't whine about it? Originally by: Tippia I take it that none of you "lol nothing is lost" people would mind even a bit if the HUD was removed in space? You aren't right. HUD is useful. More than "double-click somewhere in space to open ship's cargo hold" or "ship spinning".
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 14:47:00 - [92] Originally by: Miss Rabblt Once Microsoft disabled direct access to PC resources in Windows. And it was really nice and useful feature! You mean those resources you can still access directly, but which were supplemented by more generic methods that put the onus on the hardware manufacturers to provide proper support for their products, rather than on the software manufacturers to have to support every last bit of kit out thee? àwhich has very little to do with the topic at hand. Quote: You aren't right. HUD is useful. So was the functionality of the hangar view, and just like there are work-arounds for all of that, you don't really need the HUD because there are work-arounds for that as well. So let's remove it! You won't complain. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.08 14:52:00 - [93] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Noddy Comet I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before. You can't double-click anywhere to open your cargo hold. You cannot direcly and always access all of your ship menus by simply right-clicking the ship in front of you. You cannot activate a ship by dragging it out the hangar. Actually you can double click your ship in the ship hangar to open the cargo, which is pretty close. - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Newt Rondanse	Posted - 2011.08.08 14:58:00 - [94] Well, if you only care about accessing the myriad cargo holds and drone bays on the ship you are currently in, then I suppose having to click on the tiny icon in the ship bay instead of anywhere on the screen is a horrible inconvenience for you. ... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 15:03:00 - [95] Originally by: Newt Rondanse BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! So you're on board with the idea of removing the HUD, then, I take it. Excellent. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
De'Veldrin Minmatar Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.08.08 15:32:00 - [96] First, let's clear up the semantics arguments. Functionality wasn't removed (with the exception of the purely cosmetic function of being able to spin your ship)- what was changed was how you access that functionality, and yes, some of those changes were for the worse, but they certainly aren't game breaking. From the tactical standpoint, CQ is a PITA because it does slow down reloading, ship changing, etc, so honestly, I can see the argument there. i would fix that by replacing the door with a static image of your current ship that allows you to perform the same functions in the same way as the previous hangar view. As for removing the HUD, Tippia, that's a disingenuous argument, especially coming from a poster of your caliber. Removing the HUD would make the core part of the game completely unplayable - it's not even of the same scale as the changes made to the hangar. --Vel Originally by: Blacksquirrel This is EVE. PVE can happen anywhere at anytime. Be prepared.
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 16:05:00 - [97] Originally by: De'Veldrin As for removing the HUD, Tippia, that's a disingenuous argument, especially coming from a poster of your caliber. Removing the HUD would make the core part of the game completely unplayable - it's not even of the same scale as the changes made to the hangar. It's more of a reductio ad absurdum kind of argument. If it's ok to remove one part of the UI that provides quick and easy access to commonly used functions for no good reason (and it's ok to do so because there are work-arounds to do the same thing), then it's ok to remove some other part for the UI for the same reason (especially since it, too, can be accessed in other ways). Yes, the HUD may be a more critical component for some, but it isn't for everyone and what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It certainly wouldn't be unplayable ù just keep the log and fitting windows up, and you're good to go. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Sieges	Posted - 2011.08.08 16:27:00 - [98] Originally by: Smoking Blunts im looking at a door, that does way less than before Me too. I hope they reintroduce Ship Spinnng and have a separate button in the UI to "Enter CQ".
De'Veldrin Minmatar Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.08.08 16:44:00 - [99] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: De'Veldrin As for removing the HUD, Tippia, that's a disingenuous argument, especially coming from a poster of your caliber. Removing the HUD would make the core part of the game completely unplayable - it's not even of the same scale as the changes made to the hangar. It's more of a reductio ad absurdum kind of argument. If it's ok to remove one part of the UI that provides quick and easy access to commonly used functions for no good reason (and it's ok to do so because there are work-arounds to do the same thing), then it's ok to remove some other part for the UI for the same reason (especially since it, too, can be accessed in other ways). Yes, the HUD may be a more critical component for some, but it isn't for everyone and what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It certainly wouldn't be unplayable ù just keep the log and fitting windows up, and you're good to go. And how does one launch drones with no Hud? Don't get me wrong, I see your point, and I agree with it, to an extent. I don't like it when software changes make what I am trying to do harder. --Vel Originally by: Blacksquirrel This is EVE. PVE can happen anywhere at anytime. Be prepared.
Newt Rondanse	Posted - 2011.08.08 17:32:00 - [100] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Newt Rondanse BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! So you're on board with the idea of removing the HUD, then, I take it. Excellent. Sure, as long as there is something else that lets us monitor our ship's status and activate/deactivate modules while in space. Which there isn't, and if there was it would be a HUD. What you are suggesting is simply absurd, not even worth ennobling with a latin name.
Sieges	Posted - 2011.08.08 18:33:00 - [101] Originally by: Trig Onami The reason they took it away is because if you looked closely: Windows had this "shine" to them. When you spun your ship.. the shine travelled around the windows, based on the non-carbon-based lighting used on your ship in the old hangar. They have to basically start from scratch with the new lighting from carbon engine to re-implement this feature. If this is true then we will still have horrid performance if they ever let us sit and spin again
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.08 18:38:00 - [102] Originally by: De'Veldrin Originally by: Tippia Originally by: De'Veldrin As for removing the HUD, Tippia, that's a disingenuous argument, especially coming from a poster of your caliber. Removing the HUD would make the core part of the game completely unplayable - it's not even of the same scale as the changes made to the hangar. It's more of a reductio ad absurdum kind of argument. If it's ok to remove one part of the UI that provides quick and easy access to commonly used functions for no good reason (and it's ok to do so because there are work-arounds to do the same thing), then it's ok to remove some other part for the UI for the same reason (especially since it, too, can be accessed in other ways). Yes, the HUD may be a more critical component for some, but it isn't for everyone and what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It certainly wouldn't be unplayable ù just keep the log and fitting windows up, and you're good to go. And how does one launch drones with no Hud? Don't get me wrong, I see your point, and I agree with it, to an extent. I don't like it when software changes make what I am trying to do harder. there is a shortcut for launching drones. well there used to be, not sure if that was also removed
Ranger 1 Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2011.08.08 18:55:00 - [103] Edited by: Ranger 1 on 08/08/2011 18:56:26 To be really, really specific... the question is not why was functionality removed from our station environment. The functionality we enjoyed previously was part of the old station environment, and that no longer exists. The true question is why was the previous functionality not recreated for this new station environment. The distinction is subtle, true, but I think it's important to remember that they didn't just yank something handy out and throw it in the bin for no reason. The threw out the whole thing, probably with very good reason, and simply have not yet recreated something as simple to use for the new station environment. I suspect that simply pulling the old code and tossing it back in would not work very well. It will have to be recreated, or something very close to it will have to be coded. Either way, it will probably take a bit of time. It's just unfortunate that this wasn't done before it was released. ===== The world will not end in 2012, however there will be a serious nerf to Planetary Interaction.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.08.08 19:07:00 - [104] Edited by: De''Veldrin on 08/08/2011 19:07:21 Originally by: Smoking Blunts there is a shortcut for launching drones. well there used to be, not sure if that was also removed Actually, there's not, and I doubt there ever was for the simple reason that the short cut cannot know which of the drones in my drone hold I mean to launch. Certainly I can hit CTRL+ALT+L (if it existed) to launch drones, but which drones? My carrier has over 300 drones in the drone bay - which of those would shoot out into space? In this case, the HUD is essential - there is literally NO OTHER WAY to launch a specific group of drones - removing the HUD doesn't just make things harder, it literally breaks two whole classes of ships (carriers and moms), as well as severely gimping several other specific models (Dominix, et al.). --Vel Originally by: Blacksquirrel This is EVE. PVE can happen anywhere at anytime. Be prepared.
Smoking Blunts	Posted - 2011.08.08 19:16:00 - [105] im pretty sure there was but oh well that was a long long time ago i looked, ive had 2 kids since then anyhow when ccp are you restoring the functionality that you removed and promised to reinstate in the blog from over a month ago?
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.08 21:28:00 - [106] Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 08/08/2011 21:29:06 Originally by: Ranger 1 The threw out the whole thing, probably with very good reason, and simply have not yet recreated something as simple to use for the new station environment. This is the worrying thing though - what possible reason that makes sense, could there be, to remove a bit of functionality that was habitually ingrained for a whole bunch of players? There are two tolerably sensible rationales, certainly, for forcing CQ on people - you want to get them used to "being their avatar" instead of "being their ship", and you want to shove NeX in their faces. These may be misguided rationales, and that's arguable, but they are rationales. However, it makes no sense whatsoever not to duplicate and carry over the same, or analogous functionality to the new system (and its cut-down alternative i.e. the door). It makes no sense, because to do so is to stop immersion in its tracks for a huge number of players. It's not some tweak that only affects a few, but something that, as we have seen, affects what one could probably assume is a substantial minority of players - and is still affecting returning players (as we can see). Why do that? So that's the worrying thing: it seems like a change that wasn't thought through. This compounds the suspicion that EVE may not in fact be "safe hands" with CCP, it exacerbates the niggling worry that's arisen for many since the leaked Newsletter - the worry that CCP is losing touch with what makes EVE EVE. If they are so blasT about something small but fundamental, where else are they not "getting" their own game? Even, practically speaking, is the "team" that's working on the game now the same "team" that invented its basically clever and deep gameplay systems years ago? Is the management team the same? I've seen something like this happen with another company, Cryptic. Cryptic made a great game of its kind, City of Heroes, widely praised, and loved by many; years later it made a game (Champions Online) that was in many ways (not all, but many ways) inferior to the first game they made. For example, CoX was a PUG-ing game par excellence, which made it stand out from the crowd; yet CO is more typical of modern cookie-cutter MMOs in being mostly a solo game. Cryptic recognised this flaw, and at one point could be found asking plaintively on the forums for suggestions to improve teaming. In response, someone said on the forums: "how can they be asking us for ideas about teaming, when they'd already knocked it out of the park with CoX"? So the worry is, is the loss of functionality of Hangar view just another symptom that CCP is gradually drifting, or already has gradually drifted away from understanding their own game in the way that many of its players understand it? A few months ago, someone asked CCP devs to say if they still played the game. It turns out that a gratifying number of devs do indeed play the game, but very few of them PvP, mostly PvE. Is this significant? Before "Fearless", I might have said no; after "Fearless", I wonder if it isn't of a piece with the seeming misunderstanding of their own players in the Newsletter, the infamous devblogs and email, and the subsequent floundering-around and mummery with the CSM. It all begins to look like EVE is either getting out of focus, or simply changing into another type of game - more of a game, and less of a virtual world. More like other MMOs. ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.08 21:48:00 - [107] Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian This is the worrying thing though - what possible reason that makes sense, could there be, to remove a bit of functionality that was habitually ingrained for a whole bunch of players? The code they removed was more than likely ancient, and could not be re-tooled to work in the new UI before launch and was decided to ditch it in order to make way for improvements. I have to do that all the time at work...I have 10 year old code that I eventually just get sick of **ing with and just ditch it all and re-write because it didn't work right after migrating database platforms...I'm constantly poking at really old code I didn't write to begin with trying to fix tiny little things that have no documentation that break and slowly snowball into larger issues...I'm actually in the middle of re-writing very critical code at the moment in order to be able to deploy a remote version of our accounting software. It sucks, but give them a bit of time to re-factor that ancient ** into what they have to work with now...it's not as easy as some people try to make it out to be around here. - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:17:00 - [108] Edited by: Tippia on 08/08/2011 22:18:15 Originally by: De'Veldrin And how does one launch drones with no Hud? The same way you do now ù through the drone window. I'm not talking about removing windows ù I'm talking about the collective HP/cap/speed display and module button array (usually) located at the centre of your screen (which is commonly referred to by CCP as the HUD). Quite useless stuff. Remove it. Originally by: Barakkus The code they removed was more than likely ancient, and could not be re-tooled to work in the new UI before launch and was decided to ditch it in order to make way for improvements. They had just revamped the hotkey system, so if it suddenly didn't support double-clicks (which it most obviously does since manual manoeuvring still works), that would have been silly. It does, so removing that functionality makes no sense. They had also quite recently revamped the whole windowing system, and it still obviously accepts things like right-clicks and drop targets so that removal makes no sense either. And finally, the non-CQ environment can obviously display static images, much like how the old one did, which means that there is no technical obstacle to show what ship is currently active. Ship spinning? Yes, it's gone in the non-CQ environment, but so whatà the actual functionality is what matters and there was no reason to remove it.
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:19:00 - [109] Originally by: Tippia And finally, the non-CQ environment can obviously display static images, much like how the old one did, which means that there is no technical obstacle to show what ship is currently active. You are making assumptions about code you have no intimate knowledge of, unless you're a dev alt.
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:20:00 - [110] Originally by: Barakkus You are making assumptions about code you have no intimate knowledge of I know that the code can display an image. I know this because it does. I even know how to alter that image, which requires zero dev ability. There are no assumptions being made here.
Aias Telemonias	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:24:00 - [111] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Noddy Comet I can do everything now in my quarters that I could before. You can't double-click anywhere to open your cargo hold. You cannot direcly and always access all of your ship menus by simply right-clicking the ship in front of you. You cannot activate a ship by dragging it out the hangar. What is this with people being unable to open their cargos by double-clicking on their ships? Were you able to open cargo by double-clicking on your ship back in the ship-spin (old) hangar? I can open my ship's cargo by double-clicking on it in the actual ships hangar just fine. I'm guessing that since everybody seems to be having trouble with this that you used to be able to open cargo by double-clicking on your active ship in the old ship-spin hangar.
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:30:00 - [112] Originally by: Aias Telemonias What is this with people being unable to open their cargos by double-clicking on their ships? Were you able to open cargo by double-clicking on your ship back in the ship-spin (old) hangar? You were able to open the cargo bay by double-clicking pretty much anywhere outside a window (and on any ship in your Ships window, if you had it open). Now you have to have your Ships window open and have to make sure your active ship is in view and only then can you open its cargo bay by double-clicking it. Your confusion seems to come from your assumption that when people say "hangar", they mean the Ships window, when they actually mean the view you had over the hangar and of your ship floating in it. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
rootimus maximus Caldari	Posted - 2011.08.08 22:39:00 - [113] Originally by: De'Veldrin Actually, there's not, and I doubt there ever was for the simple reason that the short cut cannot know which of the drones in my drone hold I mean to launch. Certainly I can hit CTRL+ALT+L (if it existed) to launch drones, but which drones? My carrier has over 300 drones in the drone bay - which of those would shoot out into space? If you right click on your drone menu and select launch drones it throws as many (random?) drones out as your skills / ship allow. A shortcut to do exactly that would be better than nothing. _____________________________________ I don't think we should complain about it... or CCP may try to fix it and OMG!!!... no, not good...
De'Veldrin Minmatar Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.08.09 14:17:00 - [114] Originally by: rootimus maximus Originally by: De'Veldrin Actually, there's not, and I doubt there ever was for the simple reason that the short cut cannot know which of the drones in my drone hold I mean to launch. Certainly I can hit CTRL+ALT+L (if it existed) to launch drones, but which drones? My carrier has over 300 drones in the drone bay - which of those would shoot out into space? If you right click on your drone menu and select launch drones it throws as many (random?) drones out as your skills / ship allow. A shortcut to do exactly that would be better than nothing. Actually it might be worse than nothing. Imagine I need to launch fighters and what shoots out are light repair drones. --Vel Originally by: Blacksquirrel This is EVE. PVE can happen anywhere at anytime. Be prepared.
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.09 14:26:00 - [115] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Barakkus You are making assumptions about code you have no intimate knowledge of I know that the code can display an image. I know this because it does. I even know how to alter that image, which requires zero dev ability. There are no assumptions being made here. You are now over simplifying the issue. - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Soi Mala Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen	Posted - 2011.08.09 14:33:00 - [116] Originally by: Barakkus Originally by: Tippia And finally, the non-CQ environment can obviously display static images, much like how the old one did, which means that there is no technical obstacle to show what ship is currently active. You are making assumptions about code you have no intimate knowledge of, unless you're a dev alt. You are aware that before CQ, the option to not load station environment was still there? Only before, it'd show a static picture of the hangar, complete with your current ship, and all the double click and drag and drop functionality. So it isn't really assumptions about code, we know what was there before, and we know it was removed in favour of the door. Considering this was given to us as a "legacy option" (legacy usually meaning a continuation of the old way), there was no reason whatsoever to change from the fully functioning static hangar, to the door (aside from either a) spite, or b) a pitiful attempt to force people into incarna).
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.09 14:45:00 - [117] Originally by: Barakkus You are now over simplifying the issue. Where's the over-simplification? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:13:00 - [118] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Barakkus You are now over simplifying the issue. Where's the over-simplification? Because you can hack up and put any old image there doesn't necessarily mean that it's "easy" to just toss some images in and swap them out based on particular criteria. The old static image when you disabled ship spinning in the previous client seemed to actually render a static image based on the model and station environment on the fly, which that code was more than likely removed completely because they revamped all the station code for CQ. If they were going to just add in static images they're going to either write code to do the old static rendering or they are going to have to get the art department to mess with creating static images with all the combinations of ships/station environments...niether of which is probably very "easy". I expect a little more from you honestly, you're quite intelligent, I get that you're mad, but seriously...I'm sure you also understand what it takes to write code, and do it well...without intimate knowledge of the underlying code you can not just flat out say something is "easy". - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Crystal Liche	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:16:00 - [119] Originally by: Smoking Blunts Quote: 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 load station environments will remain in the Settings menu. so its a little over a month since this was posted in a dev blog Linkage whats the time table for the restoration of the functionality we lost with CQ? Just undock, you can spin till your hearts content...
Miss Rabblt	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:24:00 - [120] Originally by: Brusanan The only useful feature of Incarna is the static door image that most players see while docked. it was their choice of heart isn't it? they even made thousands of forum posts "first i've done after Incarna loaded". So why do you whine about it?
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:29:00 - [121] Originally by: Barakkus Because you can hack up and put any old image there doesn't necessarily mean that it's "easy" to just toss some images in and swap them out based on particular criteria. True enough. Simple DirectX APIs that the game already uses ensures that it's very easy to do that. Quote: If they were going to just add in static images they're going to either write code to do the old static rendering àwhich is basically still in the game. The important asset (the ship) is still there, and the methods to render them on the fly into a (semi)static image, and picking up those images for immediate display are still being used. Quote: I expect a little more from you honestly, you're quite intelligent Yes, so don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that any of this is even remotely difficult considering what the current, revamped UI and mouse/keyboard event code can do. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Soi Mala Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:35:00 - [122] Originally by: Barakkus Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Barakkus You are now over simplifying the issue. Where's the over-simplification? Because you can hack up and put any old image there doesn't necessarily mean that it's "easy" to just toss some images in and swap them out based on particular criteria. The old static image when you disabled ship spinning in the previous client seemed to actually render a static image based on the model and station environment on the fly, which that code was more than likely removed completely because they revamped all the station code for CQ. If they were going to just add in static images they're going to either write code to do the old static rendering or they are going to have to get the art department to mess with creating static images with all the combinations of ships/station environments...niether of which is probably very "easy". I expect a little more from you honestly, you're quite intelligent, I get that you're mad, but seriously...I'm sure you also understand what it takes to write code, and do it well...without intimate knowledge of the underlying code you can not just flat out say something is "easy". The code was there before, the old station environment is still there, you can see it from your balcony, or when the camera ****s up you can see the entire old environment, with a tiny room rather ungracefully rendered down in the corner, like looking at a counterstrike map from above... But of course the entire problem could've been solved with a simple CHOICE. Why remove the old option at all? What would be wrong with docking normally, and then CHOOSING to de-pod into CQ? When someone can offer a valid reason for not having that choice, I'l buy a monocle.
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.08.09 15:51:00 - [123] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Barakkus Because you can hack up and put any old image there doesn't necessarily mean that it's "easy" to just toss some images in and swap them out based on particular criteria. True enough. Simple DirectX APIs that the game already uses ensures that it's very easy to do that. Quote: If they were going to just add in static images they're going to either write code to do the old static rendering àwhich is basically still in the game. The important asset (the ship) is still there, and the methods to render them on the fly into a (semi)static image, and picking up those images for immediate display are still being used. Quote: I expect a little more from you honestly, you're quite intelligent Yes, so don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that any of this is even remotely difficult considering what the current, revamped UI and mouse/keyboard event code can do. So hurry up and code it yourself and give the code to CCP then. Until then don't sit there and pontificate how easy something is, you're just reducing yourself to a troll otherwise. - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Tippia Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.08.09 16:01:00 - [124] Originally by: Barakkus So hurry up and code it yourself and give the code to CCP then. Ok, let me amend that: don't insult your own intelligence. I know you're smarter than that. I don't have to code anything ù CCP already has; it's already in the game. They have lost exactly one part ù the old hangar assets ù and that one isn't needed to begin with, so nothing of what they need is actually lost. And that is why the removal is so senseless. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Asuri Kinnes Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated	Posted - 2011.08.09 19:55:00 - [125] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Barakkus So hurry up and code it yourself and give the code to CCP then. Ok, let me amend that: don't insult your own intelligence. I know you're smarter than that. I don't have to code anything ù CCP already has; it's already in the game. They have lost exactly one part ù the old hangar assets ù and that one isn't needed to begin with, so nothing of what they need is actually lost. And that is why the removal is so senseless. Besides, as mentioned above, there is only one reason that really explains why you are instantly decanted from your pod upon docking, and includes all the evidence to date. So you have to look at your re-tarrd'd avatar. Exposure to the NEX store. Like I've said before, I would have been much more likely to use the dam thing if it hadn't been forced. Which is the bottom line for me. Wormholes: The NEW end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs. NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA!
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.09 22:07:00 - [126] Originally by: Soi Mala But of course the entire problem could've been solved with a simple CHOICE. Why remove the old option at all? What would be wrong with docking normally, and then CHOOSING to de-pod into CQ? When someone can offer a valid reason for not having that choice, I'l buy a monocle. Hear hear! CCP, if you can give us a good reason for removing a fundamental (and promised!) choice from a game that's supposed to be all about choice, I too will buy a monocle! ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding
Motoko Ku5anagi	Posted - 2011.08.10 07:09:00 - [127] You have to realize that CCP is using their own 'advertising' medium to provide the maximum visibility to their new and upcoming changes/additions. It just wouldn't make sense for them to do all that work for incarna, but allow people to completely ignore it by leaving an option to leave things just the way they were (some people actually want the default to be 'good old way'). It's not evil, it's just good business sense. CCP knows whatever inconvenience (possibly on purpose to discourage it) the 'door' feature presents is too minor and nit-picky for anyone to quit over, compared to thousands of players who log on and get exposed to Incarna. People will like it or hate it, but eventually they all will just accept it and move on to other things. If they provide the 'lost functionality', it'd probably be integrated into CQ, maybe double-click on the hologram or something. The promise for a return of the old hanger is most likely just something said to ease the tension during the past few weeks.
Rommiee	Posted - 2011.08.10 11:27:00 - [128] Originally by: Smoking Blunts Originally by: Devai Starchild Because it is not optional. Its similar to being able to disable space. The only reason they allow you to disable it now is because some graphics cards can't handle it. When it is optimized, you won't have that option. but we should have that option and was spouted by ccp as an option. but that being beside the point. when do we get the restored functionality back that was promised in that blog of over a month ago. id just like a rough guide. 1 expansion, 2 expansion. 18 months even. just an idea. do you have an idea when devai? In all reality, they probably said that they would re-intrduce it in some form just to shut us all up at the time. Also they used the phrase "some time in the future" so that they don't have to give any sort of time frame. With CCP's history, tbh I cant see it ever coming back, even though a large number of us complained loudly at the time.
Barbelo Valentinian Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2011.08.10 15:00:00 - [129] Originally by: Motoko Ku5anagi You have to realize that CCP is using their own 'advertising' medium to provide the maximum visibility to their new and upcoming changes/additions. It just wouldn't make sense for them to do all that work for incarna, but allow people to completely ignore it by leaving an option to leave things just the way they were (some people actually want the default to be 'good old way'). It's not evil, it's just good business sense. This makes sense for new players, of course - if you get new players used to CQ as default, they start with it, and start off with the sense of being their avatar, that's fine and dandy. But the reasoning you point out above makes no sense at all for people who've already been playing the game - and CQ as default (with the awful "door" as the only option to that) has in fact alienated some not-inconsiderable number of players, as can be seen from the continuing posts here from returning players, and from many of the responses in the quitter thread, and as could easily have been deduced from the following: there was (IIRC) a poll at some point in the fairly recent past in which a majority of players wanted WiS to be an option off of Hangar; CSM recommended it strenuously to CCP; and many players mentioned it on the Test server. For older players, precisely making it an option would have made them more friendly towards Incarna, since making it default has highlighted its inadequacy. IOW, had it been an option, as promised, I think people would have moseyed along in their own good time, checked it out, laughed and pointed, but accepted it as a first iteration that showed some promise, without too much complaint. But now, the fact that it was default, and the fact that the old sense of "home" is gone - these have compounded the whole mess unnecessarily. ***** "To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.