Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet

---

OP, CCP have always been adamant in not returning the old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Sonva Lat

---

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet

---

OP, CCP have always been adamant in not returning the old hangar view.

---

They used to be adamant that all the WiS stuff would be completely optional and you would never have to leave your ship if you didn't want to.

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

IIRC, they said it would return "in some form". They've always been pretty adamant that the old hangar is gone forever.

---

Quote:

---

Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

Reminder: CCP never made a promise

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

WTB your problems. where ship spinning is 0.00000000001% important for the gameplay.

---

Originally by: Tea Leaves

---

Edited by: Tea Leaves on 01/09/2011 08:55:53


.......CSM "emergency" a$$ kissing festival.......

---

Originally by: Lady Ce'Nedra

---

Do you not get it yet?

CSM - paid by CCP in *secret* to say and do exactly as CCP say.

CCP - Liars and dont care about the playter base

Sooner you realise it, the better off you will be!

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

Reminder: CCP never made a promise

---

Why do you want to remind people about something that is false? That's not really a ôreminderö as much as ôhistory revisionismö.

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

O.K., show me where CCP wrote: "We'll promis you that..."

---

Originally by: Dratic

---

it really doesn't surprise me considering ccps attitude towards its player base, they really don't play their own game/hobby will be interesting to see the exodus when they try and force us to use incarna for real.

---

Originally by: Brooks Puuntai

---

Edited by: Brooks Puuntai on 01/09/2011 11:13:36
This really isn't surprising. They only said they would "look into it" to shut people up. They aren't going to waste resources on a hanger view or ship spinning. It also shouldn't be a surprise that CQ would be optional for long, especially once they released the NeX store. CCP is notorious for breaking promises and failing to deliver.

edit: To all you haters ship spinning was like 50% of this game.

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Originally by: octahexx Charante

---

why would any sane company spend loads of workhours in making an enviroment that will be the source of money income..as in buying clothes to your avatar...and then make it optional so nobody will actually buy anything?

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

Originally by: nikolaj

---

I'm quite sure that that functionality and those lightweight mechanics are still there

---

Quote:

---

i might be wrong though, at least they were there last time i played and that wa.. hm.. well.. yesterday actually... As for CQ, i'm quite certain there's an option in the settings that disables it?

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 11:34:30

Originally by: nikolaj

---

I'm quite sure that that functionality and those lightweight mechanics are still there

---

Quite possible. That just makes CCP liars of a different kind since they're claiming that it's oh so difficult to bring it back.

Quote:

---

i might be wrong though, at least they were there last time i played and that wa.. hm.. well.. yesterday actually... As for CQ, i'm quite certain there's an option in the settings that disables it?

---

You are indeed wrong since no, the functionality is not there, and disabling CQ does not bring the functionality (or, surprisingly enough) the light-weight:ness back.

---

Originally by: Brooks Puuntai

---

Pro tip.

Theres no arguing with Tippia. It only ends badly trust me.

---

Originally by: nikolaj

---

The station panel is still there with all the little shiney buttons.

---

Quote:

---

you should probably look to an upgrade BEFORE laying it all on CCP.

---

Quote:

---

granted, my 4 alts have their graphics toned way down

---

Originally by: octahexx Charante

---

they must also in someway force you to actually get out of the room

---

Originally by: Grey Stormshadow

---

I took my car to service and now every time I drive it to garage, I suddenly get teleported into my living room. Perfectly normal :excellence:.

---

Originally by: nikolaj

---

Originally by: Brooks Puuntai

---

Pro tip.

Theres no arguing with Tippia. It only ends badly trust me.

---

Thanks for the tip, i however, enjoy a little emotinal pain, i blame my mother!

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

IIRC, they said it would return "in some form". They've always been pretty adamant that the old hangar is gone forever.

---

Quote:

---

Unknown Submitter> A large number of EVE players do not like to leave their ship every time they dock. Some have computer hardware issues running several clients, some find it extremely immersion breaking and completely against EVE lore, and some would just rather abstain from Incarna alltogether. The return of the old ship hanger or some version of it with a disembark button would make all those people happy. When does CCP plan to do it?

Response> No, we don't have any plans for that. Incarna is essentially an addition that is central to the future of EVE.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

Originally by: pussnheels

---

That is uther bull****

---

Quote:

---

What did they change when they launched incarnia nothing except

---

Quote:

---

And don t give us the crap. About hardware problems ccp warned us almost a year in advance

---

Quote:

---

Secondly ccp said they will in time give players another option than CQ but they never promised the return of shipspinning

---

Originally by: pussnheels

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

That is uther bull****

What did they change when they launched incarnia nothing except
They added CQ it doesn t even break the gamemechanics and actually adds to the game. Immersion
Sure it isn t perfect yet but i believe it will only get better for the rest they actually fixed some older bugs and added the new turrets
So please show us what gamebreaking object did they add
And don t give us the crap. About hardware problems ccp warned us almost a year in advance that the hardware requirements would go up or the bull**** about the nex shop , obvious you don t understand the word optional
Secondly ccp said they will in time give players another option than CQ but they never promised the return of shipspinning

Really sometimes some of you people are just whinning just because you can

---

Originally by: Myfanwy Heimdal

---

Someone please explain to me what is so good abou the ability to spin one's ship and why this pointless behaviour is being missed? Particularly if one wishes to spin it then all one has to do ia to open the Fitting window and spin it there?

I am not bothered about walking in quarters. My character(s) live in a pod and the option to play Butt Plug Ken and Barbie (judging by the way they walk which was clearly modelled on the 1960s Thunderbirds series) has been well and truly turned off.

So, if one wishes to play Walking With Haemorrhoids then one can. If one wishes to spin ships one can. It's all there, folks. Just, please, stop whining.

---

Originally by: Myfanwy Heimdal

---

Someone please explain to me what is so good abou the ability to spin one's ship and why this pointless behaviour is being missed? Particularly if one wishes to spin it then all one has to do ia to open the Fitting window and spin it there?

I am not bothered about walking in quarters. My character(s) live in a pod and the option to play Butt Plug Ken and Barbie (judging by the way they walk which was clearly modelled on the 1960s Thunderbirds series) has been well and truly turned off.

So, if one wishes to play Walking With Haemorrhoids then one can. If one wishes to spin ships one can. It's all there, folks. Just, please, stop whining.

---

Originally by: Myfanwy Heimdal

---

Someone please explain to me what is so good abou the ability to spin one's ship and why this pointless behaviour is being missed?

---

Quote:

---

Just, please, stop whining.

---

Originally by: Myfanwy Heimdal

---

So it's not about Ship Spinning, per se, then. It's about the very useful interface which has been lost.

That I can agree with; but be careful asking for Ship Spinning, CCP may just give you what you ask for...

---

Originally by: some other thread

---

Here's a Eurogamer hands-on preview of Incarna from 2008, yes, 2008! Read it, compare to what we've got in 2011, and weep:

- When you dock your ship, you can choose to exit your pod to your captain's quarters. Your large, organic pilot's pod leads to a dressing room for choosing costume options, and a generically curvy and antiseptic space-lounge with open-plan kitchen (and a box of "protein delicacies") and animated news screen. An elevator takes you down to the station itself.

- You'll be able to rent a "socket", buy a bar blueprint and insert it. Set your own restrictions on the clientele, hire NPCs to populate the bar (including dancers), even craft dialogue rules for them to create your own little quasi-missions and adventure storylines. Then sit back and watch the beer money roll in.

- Corporation offices will probably be the true hubs of station activity. They'll be split into two areas, a foyer open to everybody where programmed NPCs spout recruitment slogans and give away stuff, and a meeting room for members.

- On the development agenda, but not promised for the first release, is a shared tactical map, fed by information from scouts, that can be used to organise logistics and battle operations on a macro level. On a micro level, there will be mini-games, including a tactical strategy game played out on hexagonal board ("very good if I say so myself", says Olafsson).

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 11:28:23

Originally by: octahexx Charante

---

why would any sane company spend loads of workhours in making an enviroment that will be the source of money income..as in buying clothes to your avatar...and then make it optional so nobody will actually buy anything?

---

Because those who are going to buy stuff are not going to use the option not to load the environment where it matters and because those who are being forced to use stuff they do not want and have no interest in will make life miserable for those who do want to use it, and will still not buy stuff.

If no-body will actually use it, then the correct choice is to not spend loads of man-hours into making it to begin with. In effect, forcing people only shows that CCP ahs zero confidence in its own product.

---

Originally by: Dee Luxx

---

Not meaning to insult anyone but from the perspective of someone who's experienced most of what the other mmos have to offer... ship spinning? Really?

---

Originally by: Mr Kidd

---

Tippia, what you're saying is right on. But, lets not forget there will be those that will use CQ and still want the option to keep it from loading when their motivations are to play the spaceship portion of the game and not the WiS portion of the game. CCP needs to accommodate the ability to just turn it off.

---

Quote:

---

What CCP wants to do with WiS is essentially making a non-integral activity essential to every activity that depends on station docking even when WiS serves no purpose. That's CCP's mistake. [etc]

---

Originally by: Dee Luxx

---

I'd like to apologize beforehand because this is a bit of a rant and I am not on your hate wagon.

Coming from the other games out there, this whole ship spinning sounds a bit ridiculous. Not meaning to insult anyone but from the perspective of someone who's experienced most of what the other mmos have to offer... ship spinning? Really?

EVE has been around for eight years and has been developed non-stop the whole time... how many expansions have you had to pay for? Heck you do not even have to pay a subscription if you farm plex every once in awhile. How many of you are max level? Run out of content yet? I think no on both.

I guess you can just rage quit and go play one of those cookie cutter theme parks and have a character at max level within a few months. Of course you'll be raiding over and over again because that will be the only content left, just so you can get those boots you've been dying for. Oh and don't forget to pay the mandatory subscription for that hamster wheel. Also don't forget to shell out that extra money every year or so for their expansions.

Coming from all those theme parks out there I see most of you take so much for granted. Maybe you should close your subscription and try those other games and then maybe, just maybe you'll realize how silly this ship spinning debacle is.

CCP are not your parents. They are a company. Sure they make mistakes but they also have a lot more riding on the success of this game than you do. This game has thrived for eight years... eight years with no 'credible' end in sight. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume they may just know more than me and know what they are doing.

Considering the features this game offers compared to what the rest of the market offers, perhaps a bit more objectivity is needed here. Leave the ol' hate wagon parked on the side of the road and move on.

---

Originally by: octahexx Charante

---

Would anyone actually pay for getting the incarna expansion?

---

Originally by: Deviana Sevidon

---

When you look at the ship from the hangar balcony you might notice that it is already spinning. The wireframe models on your desk also show you ship spinning.

Whines like from the OP show how bitter and spoiled a good part of the EVE community has become.

---

Originally by: Dee Luxx

---

I'd like to apologize beforehand because this is a bit of a rant and I am not on your hate wagon.

Coming from the other games out there, this whole ship spinning sounds a bit ridiculous. Not meaning to insult anyone but from the perspective of someone who's experienced most of what the other mmos have to offer... ship spinning? Really?

EVE has been around for eight years and has been developed non-stop the whole time... how many expansions have you had to pay for? Heck you do not even have to pay a subscription if you farm plex every once in awhile. How many of you are max level? Run out of content yet? I think no on both.

I guess you can just rage quit and go play one of those cookie cutter theme parks and have a character at max level within a few months. Of course you'll be raiding over and over again because that will be the only content left, just so you can get those boots you've been dying for. Oh and don't forget to pay the mandatory subscription for that hamster wheel. Also don't forget to shell out that extra money every year or so for their expansions.

Coming from all those theme parks out there I see most of you take so much for granted. Maybe you should close your subscription and try those other games and then maybe, just maybe you'll realize how silly this ship spinning debacle is.

CCP are not your parents. They are a company. Sure they make mistakes but they also have a lot more riding on the success of this game than you do. This game has thrived for eight years... eight years with no 'credible' end in sight. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume they may just know more than me and know what they are doing.

Considering the features this game offers compared to what the rest of the market offers, perhaps a bit more objectivity is needed here. Leave the ol' hate wagon parked on the side of the road and move on.

---

Originally by: Quebber

---

Coming from alot of other mmo's and how those companies treat you, CCP is not perfect but better than most and as you said most of those games never get updates and improvements like eve does.

Sadly alot of veterans in eve are jaded, do not realize all they have been given in this game not the least of it being a true sandbox...

Yes I believe we should have a choice between being in pod and WIS but it is not a deal breaker, yes I enjoyed the functionality of docking and clicking instantly being able to access my ship/cargo/fuel bay without pressing the ships icon but once again it is not a deal breaker, the aurum store is a take it or leave it option not a deal breaker..

---

Originally by: Kendon riddick

---

]

I never wished i was a wormholer till this crap came out.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you wouldn't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: E man Industries

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Will remaining in the ship always be an option? will disembarking ever be push button simple and not require an undock redock?

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Othran

---

I see a lot of the same faces here saying the same things.

---

10 print "So you think there is spoon?"
20 print "There is no spoon."
30 print "There is no spoon.."
40 print "There is no spoon..."
50 print "There is no spoon...."
60 print "There is no spoon....."
70 print "Is there a spoon ?????? (Yes/No)"
80 GET A$: IF A$ = "" THEN GOTO 80
90 IF A$ = "N" THEN GOTO 100
95 GOTO 20 
100 print "Excellent - I knew that you would agree."

Originally by: Black Dranzer

---

Edited by: Black Dranzer on 01/09/2011 14:36:11

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Okay.
Okay, let me ask a question. I'll try and word it as clearly as possible to avoid conclusion. This is a very, very important question. Please answer it as best you can.

Does CCP have any intentions or plans to implement an interface with similar or identical functionality to the old hanger view?

The functionality I specifically speak of is an interface that is low in resource consumption which lets us see which ship we are currently flying, with a button in the UI which takes us to the captains quarters directly, and which is the first view we see upon entering the station.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

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.

---

Originally by: olsted

---

No. They don't.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Smoking Blunts

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

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.

---

screw ship spinning, screw the hanger view and the new cq. when will the functionality be returned, when will the double click for cargo and the drag and drop from ship hanger to swap ships be back?
even if its on to the door, i dont care. infact id prefer that to looking at the qc

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Originally by: Smoking Blunts

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

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.

---

screw ship spinning, screw the hanger view and the new cq. when will the functionality be returned, when will the double click for cargo and the drag and drop from ship hanger to swap ships be back?
even if its on to the door, i dont care. infact id prefer that to looking at the qc

---

Use a hotkey (like F9) to open your active ship's cargo, you'll thank me later.

As for viewing what active ship you are in at any given moment, I agree this needs some more content, they should probably introduce a static screenshot that appears on the wall by the door if you have CQ turned off, that shows the ship information window and changes if you change ships, because otherwise, if you have CQ turned on, it is silly to claim you do not know what ship you are in if it is not only floating enormously across the bow of your hangar deck or spinning slowly from a holoreel on your coffee table or behind your character on the interface panel when you first load CQ.

---

Originally by: Mr Kidd

---

Can you please clearly state what CCP will implement to meet the above needs?

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Black Dranzer

---

Originally by: olsted

---

No. They don't.

---

I'd prefer to hear a yes or no from an actual developer, but I appreciate your perspective.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Chargon

---

Ya can still spin ship in hanger..... first one to figure out how gets 1 iskies

---

Originally by: Strider Hiryu

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

AKA, we dont care about you gameplay experience, we want to impose CQ on you....
We dont care about functionality, we care about profit.

CCP, you make me think things might have been changing....

I am thinking I was wrong.

This saddens me, it is such a GOOD GOOD game.

WHY

WHY

Why do you not do what the player base wants?

It bewilders me.

STAN!

---

Originally by: Ratio Uknown

---

Originally by: Strider Hiryu

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

AKA, we dont care about you gameplay experience, we want to impose CQ on you....
We dont care about functionality, we care about profit.

CCP, you make me think things might have been changing....

I am thinking I was wrong.

This saddens me, it is such a GOOD GOOD game.

WHY

WHY

Why do you not do what the player base wants?

It bewilders me.

STAN!

---

If you undocked, you'd find the game still works.

But you won't. So I'll just move along now.

---

Originally by: Smoking Blunts

---

ok, i only have one hand. its for the mouse. they ruined my game play by making me use a hand i do not have

---

Originally by: Deej Montana

---

Don't like it, leave. It's not like Incarna wasn't talked about for years. Damn some of you people need to get outside in the real world more.

---

Originally by: Deej Montana

---

Don't like it, leave. It's not like Incarna wasn't talked about for years. Damn some of you people need to get outside in the real world more.

---

Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn

---

Yep, you are correct, we talked about it for years. We kept telling CCP we did not want it, that it was a waste of time, resources, and money, but they chose to ignore us. Now they will pay the price of their ignorance.

---

Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn

---

Originally by: Deej Montana

---

Don't like it, leave. It's not like Incarna wasn't talked about for years. Damn some of you people need to get outside in the real world more.

---

Yep, you are correct, we talked about it for years. We kept telling CCP we did not want it, that it was a waste of time, resources, and money, but they chose to ignore us. Now they will pay the price of their ignorance.

---

Originally by: Tea Leaves

---

Edited by: Tea Leaves on 01/09/2011 08:55:53
per the PAX

Unknown Submitter> A large number of EVE players do not like to leave their ship every time they dock. Some have computer hardware issues running several clients, some find it extremely immersion breaking and completely against EVE lore, and some would just rather abstain from Incarna alltogether. The return of the old ship hanger or some version of it with a disembark button would make all those people happy. When does CCP plan to do it?

Response> No, we don't have any plans for that. Incarna is essentially an addition that is central to the future of EVE.

So ship spinning is NOT coming back per the CSM "emergency" a$$ kissing festival. They have no intention of doing what they said they would do.

yeah. FU too CCP and your spaceship barbie bull$hit. F*cking liars.

---

Originally by: baltec1

---

Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn

---

Originally by: Deej Montana

---

Don't like it, leave. It's not like Incarna wasn't talked about for years. Damn some of you people need to get outside in the real world more.

---

Yep, you are correct, we talked about it for years. We kept telling CCP we did not want it, that it was a waste of time, resources, and money, but they chose to ignore us. Now they will pay the price of their ignorance.

---

Who is this we you speak of?

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn

---

Originally by: Deej Montana

---

Don't like it, leave. It's not like Incarna wasn't talked about for years. Damn some of you people need to get outside in the real world more.

---

Yep, you are correct, we talked about it for years. We kept telling CCP we did not want it, that it was a waste of time, resources, and money, but they chose to ignore us. Now they will pay the price of their ignorance.

---

Originally by: Black Dranzer

---

...but I don't think anybody expected it to turn out as horrendous as it did.

---

Originally by: Forum Worrier

---

So basically the complaint is that CCP is forcing you to use the station environment in which you can just as easily accomplish everything as you could in the hangar environment? Check.

---

Quote:

---

Complaining about losing the ability to right click your ship in hangar when there was already faster and more efficient ways to perform the same functions? Check.

---

Quote:

---

Complaining about losing the ability to spin your ship when it now spins for you automatically or you can spin it in fitting or ship preview? Check.

---

Quote:

---

Complaining about the half a second longer it takes to load CQ as opposed to hangar? Check.

---

Quote:

---

Complaining about nothing much at all? Check.

---

Quote:

---

Complaining about change? Check.

---

Originally by: Quebber

---

Originally by: Dee Luxx

---

I'd like to apologize beforehand because this is a bit of a rant and I am not on your hate wagon. [etc]

---

I agree with the above poster completely

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

i have experienced zero loss of functionality and zero inconvenience from the CQ. maybe you're just a whiny *****.

---

Originally by: Roime

---

Edited by: Roime on 01/09/2011 16:37:56
FFS just turn off the CQ and open your ships panel

Besides seeing what ship is currently active and having r-click access (or just doubleclick to open any cargo bay) to all your ships, you can actually have several other windows open without them blocking access to the ship in the background.

Much more efficient than what I used to do in the old hangar view, but ymmv.

---

Originally by: Suitonia

---

I wouldn't mind nearly as much if they gave an explanation that isn't a one liner that ends up causing even more player frustration and confusion.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

i have experienced zero loss of functionality and zero inconvenience from the CQ. maybe you're just a whiny *****.

---

Or maybe you're simply very inefficient in how you play EVE, since the loss of shortcuts and immediacy has no consequence for you.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 16:48:38

Originally by: Quebber

---

Originally by: Dee Luxx

---

I'd like to apologize beforehand because this is a bit of a rant and I am not on your hate wagon. [etc]

---

I agree with the above poster completely

---

Just one problem: the ôabove posterö is completely uninformed about the nature of the complaint. You're agreeing with ignorance. Are you sure you really want to do this?

Originally by: Denidil

---

i have experienced zero loss of functionality and zero inconvenience from the CQ. maybe you're just a whiny *****.

---

Or maybe you're simply very inefficient in how you play EVE, since the loss of shortcuts and immediacy has no consequence for you.

---

Originally by: baltec1

---

No I agree with him. I haven't suffered at all from these changes. The only complaint I have is that I would like to see a much easyer way to play around with the TV.

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

tippia.. you realize there is this thing called the session timer.

---

Quote:

---

you're just whining about change.

---

Quote:

---

Thank you for proving my point.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 16:59:08

Originally by: baltec1

---

No I agree with him. I haven't suffered at all from these changes. The only complaint I have is that I would like to see a much easyer way to play around with the TV.

---

àthe ôbeing inefficientö comment stands.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

No. I'm opposing the illogical, needless and pointless removal of functions, features and options in a game whose core concept is for players to create their own gameplay experience.

---

Originally by: baltec1

---

Its a whole second or two. Hardly much of an impact.

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

logic, not your strong suit.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 17:17:18

Originally by: baltec1

---

Its a whole second or two. Hardly much of an impact.

---

àI'm talking about your fiddling with the TV ù inefficiency at its best.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Edited by: Tippia on 01/09/2011 17:17:18

Originally by: baltec1

---

Its a whole second or two. Hardly much of an impact.

---

àI'm talking about your fiddling with the TV ù inefficiency at its best.

Originally by: Denidil

---

logic, not your strong suit.

---

It's called hyperbole, or, really, reductio ad absurdum. People like to throw around the whole ôresistance to changeö nonsense because they have a hard time arguing for the removal of useful features. If you really want to use that logic, stand by it and explain why resisting change is in any way an argument. Otherwise, ditch the moronic platitudes.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Sonva Lat

---

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet

---

OP, CCP have always been adamant in not returning the old hangar view.

---

They used to be adamant that all the WiS stuff would be completely optional and you would never have to leave your ship if you didn't want to.

---

They were also adamant that we would never see our ships in WIS because it would be too big a technical hurdle.

In other words, ôadamantö in CCP terms equates roughly to ôlooser and more flexible than mashed bananas.ö

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

for it to be reductio ad absurdium then "changing the UI" would have to be a superset of "takin your **** and giving it to someone else". which it isn't.

---

Quote:

---

the change in UI has no meaningful affect on gameplay

---

Quote:

---

why are you so butthurt about a minor UI change that MAKES NO ****ING DIFFERENCE.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

being that a lot of people who had to reship fast (0.0 warfare) never noticed the "missing functionality" you're *****ing about

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

tippia.. you realize there is this thing called the session timer.

---

And you realise that you can do other things in the meantime, right? The less time you have to spend wrestling with the UI (or, for that matter, waiting for pointless junk to be shuffled onto the gfx card) to make things appear that should be (and were) immediately available, the more you can get done in those 30s.

Quote:

---

you're just whining about change.

---

So if CCP automatically transferred all your assets to my hangar and wallet, you would be ok with that, because you like change. Good to know. I'll go petition for that to happen right away.

No. I'm opposing the illogical, needless and pointless removal of functions, features and options in a game whose core concept is for players to create their own gameplay experience.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

for it to be reductio ad absurdium then "changing the UI" would have to be a superset of "takin your **** and giving it to someone else". which it isn't.

---

No, it follows the ôpeople are complaining because of resistance to changeö logic to its conclusion.

---

Quote:

---

Why are you butthurt about the fact that it makes a difference and that people are saying so? Again, if it doesn't hurt you, good for you ù who cares? That just means you have nothing useful to add to the discussion.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Roime

---

Ok I understand The Door is not exactly an improvement on the esthetics front, the ship was many times better, but can you list what functionality has been lost?

---

Originally by: Tea Leaves

---

Edited by: Tea Leaves on 01/09/2011 08:55:53
per the PAX

Unknown Submitter> A large number of EVE players do not like to leave their ship every time they dock. Some have computer hardware issues running several clients, some find it extremely immersion breaking and completely against EVE lore, and some would just rather abstain from Incarna alltogether. The return of the old ship hanger or some version of it with a disembark button would make all those people happy. When does CCP plan to do it?

Response> No, we don't have any plans for that. Incarna is essentially an addition that is central to the future of EVE.

---

Originally by: Roime

---

Ok I understand The Door is not exactly an improvement on the esthetics front, the ship was many times better, but can you list what functionality has been lost?

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

I really hate it when people speak for "the player base," as if they had any idea what each individual really wanted or liked in a feature. For my part, I love CQ. I love the contrast of just being a person for a little while against being a space battleship when out and about. I love the additional immersion, the bright screens in the room, the holograms, the mirror, being able to walk out to the balcony and look at my ship from afar. It's ****ing cool, and I can't wait to see what they do with it.

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

I really hate it when people speak for "the player base," as if they had any idea what each individual really wanted or liked in a feature. For my part, I love CQ. I love the contrast of just being a person for a little while against being a space battleship when out and about. I love the additional immersion, the bright screens in the room, the holograms, the mirror, being able to walk out to the balcony and look at my ship from afar. It's ****ing cool, and I can't wait to see what they do with it.

So in summary, stop saying "the player base" hates Incarna. Because I sure don't, and nor do I miss ship spinning and the old hangar interface.

---

Originally by: Sullen Skoung

---

I really hate it when ppl who cant read have their handlers post for them

---

Quote:

---

lol when you cant win insult the person debating

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

I really hate it when people speak for "the player base," as if they had any idea what each individual really wanted or liked in a feature. For my part, I love CQ. I love the contrast of just being a person for a little while against being a space battleship when out and about. I love the additional immersion, the bright screens in the room, the holograms, the mirror, being able to walk out to the balcony and look at my ship from afar. It's ****ing cool, and I can't wait to see what they do with it.

So in summary, stop saying "the player base" hates Incarna. Because I sure don't, and nor do I miss ship spinning and the old hangar interface.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Denidil

---

for it to be reductio ad absurdium then "changing the UI" would have to be a superset of "takin your **** and giving it to someone else". which it isn't.

---

No, it follows the ôpeople are complaining because of resistance to changeö logic to its conclusion.

---

no it doesn't. because "Taking your **** and giving it to someone else" is not analogous to a cosmetic change in the user interface.


on the other hand your pitching a fit because you're asked to make the slightest adaptation to the UI is a resistance to change.

the only person here whining is you. I'm simply sick of people who are *****ing for no good reason, like you.

if you want to see a legitimate complaint about things CCP is doing go read my thread about their apparent lack of CTQ.

---

Originally by: Cdkey Disabled

---

I WANT TO SPIN SHIPS AND SEE HOW MY SHIP LOOKS IN STATION FOR **** SAKES1111!

---

Originally by: nikolaj

---

Edited by: nikolaj on 01/09/2011 11:35:46

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

I'm quite sure that that functionality and those lightweight mechanics are still there, i might be wrong though, at least they were there last time i played and that wa.. hm.. well.. yesterday actually... As for CQ, i'm quite certain there's an option in the settings that disables it?

Your whine+arguement is thus rendered invalid, stop hating, if you don't like it, quit and give someone your stuff..

Edit: to your last post

You obviously have not read the CCP Company goal/profile/whatever, they wish to become the supplier of the complete integrated sci-fi experience, they wish to do that through eve and Dust 514, Dust 514 in case you didnt know is the strategic shooter, not unlike battlefield 2/3 i guess, just a different setting, tied in with the EVE Universe, for a proper integration they need walking in stations.

CCP owns the intellectual property rights to anything EVE, they decide what they want to do, i for one is very impressed with their goal as well their progress towards it. So back to my original point, if you dont like it, quit, just stop your moaning.

---

Originally by: Forum Worrier

---

Originally by: Sullen Skoung

---

I really hate it when ppl who cant read have their handlers post for them

---

Quote:

---

lol when you cant win insult the person debating

---

---

Originally by: Suitonia

---

Edited by: Suitonia on 01/09/2011 19:53:41
I play the game, I have played the game for 5 years. I'm not angry at all I'm only voicing my concerns to a dubious game design decision that has absolutely no rationale, rhyme or reason behind it other than a one-liner posted after 2 months of ignoring us saying we can't have restored existing functionality because he said so.

I'm sorry if you're offended by people posting feedback on the forums for CCP to read. Unfortunately rational people like myself and Tippia are a dying breed getting drowned by Trolls, Fanbois and people who just rage at CCP for no reason.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

+1

I may be farther on the other side of the defense in this whole Incarna debacle, but I still know that Incarna has fallen far short of the mark that most of us have eagerly expected for years now, and the fact that we have now had more than a year of PvE or WiS related content and few actual spaceship related changes in their entirety is of course, rather unsettling.

But I am cautiously optimistic that given CCP's precedent concerning expansions, and what they have and have not released in the past year or two, that at the very least, we are bound to get some sort of spaceship related expansion this winter.

Since CCP claims they are going to be releasing changes to null, supercapitals, and black ops in the Winter Expansion, I can only assume this means they might also look at and tweak many other combat mechanic related mechanics that have been issues for a long while now.

I would rather have a forum full of Tippia's and Suitonia's whether I always agree with them or not, or how often I agree with them or not, because at least we can have a rational yet possibly at times heated discussion on the topics at hand, as opposed to this constant endless spam of thread after thread of some guy crying that CCP is an evil empire bent on world domination.


@Ragers
Give it a rest. CCP is a company, they make mistakes, we let them know, maybe they make less in the future, maybe not. And endless forum rage is very tiresome and ineffectual, if anything it will merely result in either more strict moderation, or less, in which case we all suffer equally.

Pitchforks never solved anything, there is only one end result from an angry mob with a pitchfork, there is no reason behind it, it is an angry mob by definition.

---

Originally by: Razin

---

I noticed how in your relatively verbose narration you've done your usual brown-nosing and misrepresenting while managing to completely avoid the subject matter of this thread. Nice!

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Pitchforks never solved anything

---

Originally by: Razin

---

...

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 20:33:29

Originally by: Razin

---

...

---

Oh yea, I'm a brown noser alright, that's why I was not even subbed for eight months of the last two years because I was tired of Dominion after six months and with no end in sight to the lag I wanted a break from 0.0 cuz it was unpleasant and I was tired of it and I then subsequently got bored in high security.

Yep, I'm a real CCP fan alright, you got me!

---

Originally by: Elyssa MacLeod

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 20:33:29

Originally by: Razin

---

...

---

Oh yea, I'm a brown noser alright, that's why I was not even subbed for eight months of the last two years because I was tired of Dominion after six months and with no end in sight to the lag I wanted a break from 0.0 cuz it was unpleasant and I was tired of it and I then subsequently got bored in high security.

Yep, I'm a real CCP fan alright, you got me!

---

lol a whole 8 of 24? You rebel you

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 20:33:29

Originally by: Razin

---

...

---

Oh yea, I'm a brown noser alright, that's why I was not even subbed for eight months of the last two years because I was tired of Dominion after six months and with no end in sight to the lag I wanted a break from 0.0 cuz it was unpleasant and I was tired of it and I then subsequently got bored in high security.

Yep, I'm a real CCP fan alright, you got me!

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Nah honestly tho, that was only part of it, I just needed a break from the game itself, Dominion was my reason, something I could actually be legitimately disgruntled over, etc.

---

Originally by: Bklyn 1

---

Originally by: Roime

---

Ok I understand The Door is not exactly an improvement on the esthetics front, the ship was many times better, but can you list what functionality has been lost?

---

To me at least, there does not appear to be any functionality in the cq that I cannot do more quickly and efficiently with a mere click of a mouse in the door view. In my view, cq is a step down from the door view. It's slower, unappealing and my computer seems to dislike it almost as much as I do.

It's not that I want ship spinning per se, it's just that the old hangar was better than what the cq has to offer. I understand that some people like to see a 2005 era graphics toon constantly scratching himself. But that just doesn't do it for me.

---

Originally by: Razin

---

Edited by: Razin on 01/09/2011 20:46:56

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Edited by: Mendolus on 01/09/2011 20:33:29

Originally by: Razin

---

...

---

Oh yea, I'm a brown noser alright, that's why I was not even subbed for eight months of the last two years because I was tired of Dominion after six months and with no end in sight to the lag I wanted a break from 0.0 cuz it was unpleasant and I was tired of it and I then subsequently got bored in high security.

Yep, I'm a real CCP fan alright, you got me!

---

These are just words here, I have no way to check their veracity (even if any of it was relevant to this discussion). I can, however, see your posting history. And it is quite revealing, if a little too much.

---

Originally by: pussnheels

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Prince Spiderman

---

There will be no exodus. Just a major playerbase cleanup to remove kids, nerds and whiners not really playing EVE on a "serious" level because if they would play what the game really offers they don't care about ship spinning or an optional NeX store.

---

Quite incorrect. It's people who play at a "serious level" that need ship spinning the most, because the CQ gets in the way of actual gameplay.

You do understand that ôship spinningö refers to functionality and light-weight mechanics, not to the ability to turn your ship around, right?

---

That is uther bull****

---

Originally by: Ghoest

---

Edited by: Ghoest on 01/09/2011 22:19:50
Does everyone agree with me now that Mitani is more or less a sucker that will believe anything if you treat him like hes important?

---

Originally by: Headerman

---

Jesus ****ing christ you all must be English or something cause your bloody useless whinging is epic!

---

Originally by: Razin

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

I really hate it when people speak for "the player base," as if they had any idea what each individual really wanted or liked in a feature. For my part, I love CQ. I love the contrast of just being a person for a little while against being a space battleship when out and about. I love the additional immersion, the bright screens in the room, the holograms, the mirror, being able to walk out to the balcony and look at my ship from afar. It's ****ing cool, and I can't wait to see what they do with it.

---

How can you feel immersion from popping out of your ship every time you dock if it goes against every piece of EVE lore? In addition, it's just ******ed given the game's mechanics for the overwhelming majority of docked activities.

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

As for it being ******ed in terms of docked activities... I don't even understand how that applies. What do you do when docked? Check the market? Repair your ship? Move cargo in and out? Clone yourself? Which of these activities can't be done unless your brain is hooked up to a machine? Silly.

---

Originally by: Ethan Bejorn

---

Pod pilots are not supposed to be able to leave their pod, ever.

---

Originally by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet

---

Originally by: Ethan Bejorn

---

Pod pilots are not supposed to be able to leave their pod, ever.

---

And I'm Sansha Kuvakei's right-hand soldier, proud pilot of the Ubergeddon, which has 8 XL lasers fitted to it.

CCP make the lore, not you. And in many, many chronicles you'd see that there are many, many instances where pod pilots are in fact not in their pods.

---

Originally by: Tea Leaves

---

Response> No, we don't have any plans for that. Incarna is essentially an addition that is central to the future of EVE.

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Keep rejoicing as this game circles the drain like some event horizon, inexorably bringing it to it's destruction, unable to escape the gravity well of sheer smug and bankrupt ideology that is the new business ethos while to those stuck in it time appears standstill, they can't even see the end coming.

---

Originally by: Ethan Bejorn

---

CCP is the destroyer of worlds.

---

Originally by: Information Agent

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

As for it being ******ed in terms of docked activities... I don't even understand how that applies. What do you do when docked? Check the market? Repair your ship? Move cargo in and out? Clone yourself? Which of these activities can't be done unless your brain is hooked up to a machine? Silly.

---

Along the same lines, how does it help immersion if your char is staring blankly at a random wall that has little detail on, scratching his head while you browse the market and refit ships. He just stands there, scratching his head. Its something that I find hard to connect to the various things that pilots need to do when docked.

At least when there was the old station environment with the ship in the middle you could at the very least imagine that your char was being busy with things inside, and not just standing there, blankly staring into a wall, scratching his head.

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

People that think the session timer was a bit of altruism from CCP have it dead wrong. It was removed because Carbon cannot work around it plain and simple. After 5 years of development Carbon cannot function around basic parameters that have existed in their flagship product since inception.

Carbon is a massive heap of failure and institutionalized waste, this compromise has been cloaked in false virtue and yet players would just rejoice rather than take heed of the issues at hand. It is very telling of how problematic Carbon is going to be and remain. Expect further compromise on untenable levels while the minds who brought you one of the least functional and agile engines in gaming history continue to stay the course and kneecap their own product and marginalize their customers because individuals that belong on a fishing boat or in an aluminum smelter refuse to see reality for what it is.

You aren't getting the old hanger back because Carbon just wont work with it on any level, those session timers being removed are a quick fix thus the mass testing and removal of CarbonIO. Those session timers were in place to give the server cluster time to update and ensure things were operating as they should. The implementation of Carbon is going to see an EVE more unstable and full of glaring bugs and annoyance than ever before.

Keep rejoicing as this game circles the drain like some event horizon, inexorably bringing it to it's destruction, unable to escape the gravity well of sheer smug and bankrupt ideology that is the new business ethos while to those stuck in it time appears standstill, they can't even see the end coming.

---

Originally by: Foofad

---

I don't know about your character, but my character sits on her couch and watches her giant holographic television while doing the above.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

That's your proof?

How much concurrent programming have you done?

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

That's your proof?

How much concurrent programming have you done?

---

All praise Nyan-Cat no where near enough to generate a shield of obvious deflection.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

That's your proof?

How much concurrent programming have you done?

---

Originally by: Saerathus

---

Edited by: Saerathus on 02/09/2011 02:04:02

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

Proof please?

---

[ 2011.08.09 19:01:53 ] CCP Habakuk2 > The docking and undocking changes are basically a requirement for multiplayer rooms in stations, which can be located on different server-nodes as the station itself.
[ 2011.08.09 19:02:05 ] CCP Habakuk2 > A good side-effect is, that the session change timers within the station for changing ships are gone.

It's a side effect of Carbon being unable to function around basic parameters to get WIS up and running. Weigh this behavior against CCP's historic performance and tendency to ham fist things as simple as PI and you can draw a multitude of conclusions.

---

That's your proof?

How much concurrent programming have you done?

---

Nice moving the goalposts fallacy there. I'd be interested to know how much concurrent programming YOU have done.. when the core interpreter is still singly-threaded and can never be changed.

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2332

Global interpreter lock is still and always will be an issue, no matter how much they can Frankenstein it up with CarbonIO.

EDIT: And upon doing some more research, GIL bottlenecks are just one of the many opportunities that might cause Carbon and Trinity to not play well together. Just do some reading, yeesh.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

Just to be clear, I never said you woudln't get ship spinning back, I said there wouldn't be an old hangar view.

---

Originally by: Seph Res

---

im looking forward for you to lead another op down the drain, and no i didnt lost any of my dreads, but killed you and the fat girl, it was fun for me

---

Originally by: pussnheels

---

[
They added CQ it doesn t even break the gamemechanics and actually adds to the game. Immersion

---

Originally by: Urgg Boolean

---

There is some very rational debate in parts of this thread. I hear what everyone is saying and I agree that game content is certainly an important issue.

Quality is the real issue. Today I've posted on several threads discussing broken functionality related to the new patch. It almost doesn't matter what content CCP delivers because it will be borked and/or will bork existing functionality. This will not change regardless of content.

Quality is the real issue. I know of no other game developer that consistently borks the game in obtuse and arcane ways that are seemingly unrelated to the patch content, like ships flying upside down, inability to warp to missions, difficulty close windows and plenty of other stupid little annoying items. From my perspective, CQ had/has huge potential, but they botched it bad and with CQ came all manner of breakage that continues to manifest with every new patch.

Quality is the real issue. I would be much more open to change and far less critical of content if quality was not an issue. As it is, quality in this game is laughable and pathetic which makes it difficult to be objective with any other assessments.

---

Originally by: Mendolus

---

you can proselytize all you want about how it should work in a vacuum for all I care.

---