These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

The New Inventory System on SISI - Player Words Not Being Heard
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-05-20 11:43:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
I'm appealing to the CSM to please get the word to CCP that the new Inventory system in it's current state on SISI is not functional for release.

Please you of the CSM could just check to make sure these concerns are a priority for Inferno? I don't expect my ideas to be put into the release, I do however hope that CCP see's the broken nature with the current SISI inventory system.

1.If you could just take a moment to read through the first post of this thread in the Test Server Feedback section. I've tried hard to summarize the issues while weeding out the white noise of random complaints and put constructive ideas to solve the issues surrounding the new inventory system. It has turned into a mini threadnaught, but the unified opinion is that it's just not finished and breaks too many things to release.

2. Please watch this video Tippia made as well as checking out his Blog on the subject. He does a very good job of encapsulating all the issues with the inventory that show how plain broken it is.

3. This is a response CCP has given us in concerns with the new inventory:

CCP RubberBAND seems to get it and wants to help where CCP Goliath seems to take the $1000 jeans approach.

ArrowCCP Goliath
#96
CCP Goliath wrote:
Everyone talking about multiple windows - you know that shift clicking opens up a new window right?


#111
CCP Goliath wrote:
Guys, honestly, the teams and I appreciate the feedback, and we do read it.

There is a recurrent theme in this thread of "change isn't improvement, its change", and to that I would just say look at the evolution of software as a whole - compare Windows 95 to Windows 8, IE to Chrome, etc - things can't be static forever and must evolve, sometimes in a dramatic way. Usability issues are excellent feedback. Simply saying "it's different, I don't want to adjust, give me the old one" is not particularly useful to the team. They have selected the design direction they are going in and it's not just a case of putting in a checkbox that says "use old system X" to cater to those who aren't keen on a slight adjustment to a system.

Please do keep the usability feedback coming though - for instance, the behaviour of using "loot all" and then having an extra cargo window - this is the kind of use issue that can be dealt with.


He totally missed the ball on this one... The reoccurring theme wasn't that people didn't want change, if anything, people are FOR the change. Just not in it's current state.

#116
CCP Goliath wrote:

Charming. FYI I've been at CCP since August of last year, and in my current position for 1 month. Also, there's not a game in the world that doesn't ship/release with bugs. If you don't have an understanding of QA process and software lifecycle I would thank you to keep your opinions and conjecture on the matter to yourself.


#117
CCP Goliath wrote:
Rendus wrote:



Evolving Software? Sure fine. But tools need to retain basic principals and functionality. Just taking a basic functioning tool and replace it with "new" doesn't mean you've replaced it with "better" necessarily. (MSWindows has proven that concept over and over.) Taking a stone wheel and upgrading it to a steel hub with rubber tire is an improvement but doesn't change the design or functionality. That's positive evolution.
But what we have here is a round wheel that has been replaced with an octagonal shape with an off-center axle hole. Sure it still kinda of works, but it's hard to think that it's an improvement. You've made the functional use of the tool harder to complete.
That's why people are upset. (imho)





Interesting analogy Smile. I personally look at it more like the evolution from a Flintstones model of car (totally functional, pretty basic) to a modern day automobile - there's a ton of bells and whistles on it, you're not sure if you need or want them all (but hey they're free so might as well take them), the only drawback is you need to learn how to drive it!


ArrowCCP RubberBAND
#129

#163

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Dawn Flare
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-05-20 12:21:19 UTC
Wonder if Goliath realizes that people only use Windows still because of DirectX.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-05-20 18:37:35 UTC
You're not being paranoid enough. What if the stupid huge window is actually intended to keep you from looting, thus decrease material faucet?Big smile
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-05-21 09:30:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
I would also like to mention a post by CCP RubberBAND (picking what's relevant):

Quote:
So I have a philosophical question that I am curious about. Why are so many people intent on interacting with items via the tree view and not via the ships window properly?

[...]

However on a personal note, every time I have to go back from the Unified Inventory to multiple windows, I cringe. We understand the usability concerns raised here, but once people have been given some time to acclimatize themselves, we strongly believe that this will provide the best user experience.


So basically "the way we want to use the UI is proper, regardless of what the customer wants", and "it works for me, if it doesn't work for you, HTFU".

Then later:

Quote:
Hey all, I'd just like to say, that our intention is not to ignore you, your feedback or indeed appear condescending. The feedback you are providing us is proving really, really valuable and we are working to resolve the issues you guys raise.

[...]

Our intention is to improve the user experience not hamper it.

Also kudos to Tippia who is making the most compelling arguments on the behalf of many of you. We are just human and are just looking for a conversation with the players (we want it!). But the old system is not coming back, but with your help we can make this new system what you guys need it to be.


...as long as we stick to using it "properly", I assume?

This is reminding me of incarnarage way too much. But this time there is no checkbox to disable.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-05-21 12:04:56 UTC
New Inventory Releasing Tomorrow
From: Zagdul
Sent: 2012.05.21 12:05
To: Abdiel Kavash, Dovinian, Elise Randolph, Greene Lee, Hans Jagerblitzen, Issler Dainze, Kelduum Revaan, Meissa Anunthiel, Seleene, Tippia, Trebor Daehdoow, Two step, UAxDEATH,

It appears the new Inventory System will be introduced tomorrow. I'm appealing to the CSM to please use your influence to make this a priority of iteration and draw CCP's attention to a thread I've created in the Test Server feedback section of the forums. There is a second thread in Jita Park.

There is a video which Tippia has created and a blog which outlines the very visible and obvious flaws with the new system that will make player's lives miserable.

I would like to state that I personally, and the general feedback from the thread seems to be that people do want an inventory change, however the CCP developers are fixated on the negative responses and focused on the people who are opposed to change.

There is constructive feedback and suggestions to improve on it's forward development. I'm predicting that this is going to cause a huge uproar similar to the whole Greed is Good and $1k pants debacle of last year.

I am requesting that if it's a priority to any of you that you please post in support.

Regards,
Zagdul

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#6 - 2012-05-21 12:08:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Im glad you braught this up. I have been hugely excited about the new unified inventory. Watching the video was enlightening.

I have to say though, the only problems I see were the refreshing on the windows. The windows dissapearing on undock is also a problem. I have to say though, that the chap who made that video kind of missed the point of a unified inventory, but nevermind.

So long as the window refresh is fixed I dont see any reason to delay the release. From the video I see far more pros than cons for introducing the new system. As a disclaimer though I've not been using SiSi, so I only see the problems people show on videos.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2012-05-21 12:12:21 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
Im glad you braught this up. I have been hugely excited about the new unified inventory. Watching the video was enlightening.

I have to say though, the only problems I see were the refreshing on the windows. The windows dissapearing on undock is also a problem. I have to say though, that the chap who made that video kind of missed the point of a unified inventory, but nevermind.

So long as the window refresh is fixed I dont see any reason to delay the release. As a disclaimer though I've not been using SiSi, so I only see the problems people show on videos.



Agreed, I'm all for 'a' new system.

The problem is that it's not ready and there's not much we can do about it now. So, I'd rather just try to make it a focus for CCP to look at the flaws that most of EVE will find frustrating with it.

Old functionality which worked shouldn't be pushed aside.

Other issues include POS's with multiple silos or corporate hangars which cannot be renamed. All that is included in the Test Server Feedback thread.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-05-21 14:52:20 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
Im glad you braught this up. I have been hugely excited about the new unified inventory. Watching the video was enlightening.

I have to say though, the only problems I see were the refreshing on the windows. The windows dissapearing on undock is also a problem. I have to say though, that the chap who made that video kind of missed the point of a unified inventory, but nevermind.

So long as the window refresh is fixed I dont see any reason to delay the release. From the video I see far more pros than cons for introducing the new system. As a disclaimer though I've not been using SiSi, so I only see the problems people show on videos.


I can see how many, even most EVE players, would have none or very few issues with the new inventory. If all your item-manipulating work consists of looting wrecks and dumping the loot in a station to later sell, maybe occasionally fitting a ship or two, then the new window is just fine (And by that I mean no offense.)

However for people who have to regularly manage corporation and alliance assets, POSes, doing heavy duty logistics, and so on, the new system is basically unusable. Many CSM representatives have a background in 0.0 or other major alliances, I am sure they would understand if they tried to use the new UI. And I believe that we spreadsheet masters have as much right to have a functional UI as anyone else.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#9 - 2012-05-21 14:58:44 UTC
There will be a flurry of patches in the coming week to iron out bugs and flaws once the masses get hold of it. I expect it will be working almost as intended by the weekend.

We'll see how it fares from there.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-05-21 15:03:54 UTC
Here is one very specific example how the new UI makes life hard for people maintaining a POS. Very common usage scenario: transfer POS reaction products from silo A to silo B.

Old interface:
- Open the POS management window.
- Right-click silo A in the POS mgmt window, select Access Storage. Silo A inventory opens.
- Right-click silo B in the POS mgmt window, access storage. Silo B opens in a new window.
- Transfer stuff from A to B by a single drag.

New interface:
- The UI index only shows ten items labeled "Silo". There is no way to see which silo is which by merely looking at the index. (Note, some of you may notice the "Name Item" option. It doesn't do anything.) The index also shows every single gun anchored at the POS as a separate entry, which adds dozens of completely irrelevant entries to look through.
- So you have to open the POS mgmt window again.
- Right-click silo A, click access storage. Silo A opens in The Window.
- Right-click silo B, click access storage. Silo B opens in The Window again. Whoops, now you can't get back to silo A. And there is no way to use The Window to find out which one out of the ten available silos it is.
- You can not shift-click the "access storage" option to open silo B in a new window. Shift-click only works from the index (where you can't tell which silo is which).

I have found only one possible workaround. After you open silo A, its entry in the index highlights. You can shift-click that to open A in a new window. Then you can open B through the POS management window to do the move.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-05-21 15:08:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
There will be a flurry of patches in the coming week to iron out bugs and flaws once the masses get hold of it. I expect it will be working almost as intended by the weekend.

We'll see how it fares from there.


What I am afraid is that the way CCP intends the inventory window to work is simply unusable for the kind of large-scale operations I am talking about. I don't blame CCP for not seeing that, it's not their job to run an alliance's logistics or POSes, their job is to develop a piece of software. However what I am blaming them for is ignoring the feedback provided by people who do deal with this every day, and who are now forced to use a single hammer to hammer in nails, staples, and screws.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-05-21 15:27:09 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Arduemont wrote:
Im glad you braught this up. I have been hugely excited about the new unified inventory. Watching the video was enlightening.

I have to say though, the only problems I see were the refreshing on the windows. The windows dissapearing on undock is also a problem. I have to say though, that the chap who made that video kind of missed the point of a unified inventory, but nevermind.

So long as the window refresh is fixed I dont see any reason to delay the release. From the video I see far more pros than cons for introducing the new system. As a disclaimer though I've not been using SiSi, so I only see the problems people show on videos.


I can see how many, even most EVE players, would have none or very few issues with the new inventory. If all your item-manipulating work consists of looting wrecks and dumping the loot in a station to later sell, maybe occasionally fitting a ship or two, then the new window is just fine (And by that I mean no offense.)

However for people who have to regularly manage corporation and alliance assets, POSes, doing heavy duty logistics, and so on, the new system is basically unusable. Many CSM representatives have a background in 0.0 or other major alliances, I am sure they would understand if they tried to use the new UI. And I believe that we spreadsheet masters have as much right to have a functional UI as anyone else.


There are also issues with looting wrecks.

Since window position and size is not maintained, the old trick where you'd open a ton of wrecks and they'd stack up allowing you to spam the "loot-all" button no longer exists.


Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Drake Draconis
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2012-05-21 18:57:42 UTC
Zagdul wrote:
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Arduemont wrote:
Im glad you braught this up. I have been hugely excited about the new unified inventory. Watching the video was enlightening.

I have to say though, the only problems I see were the refreshing on the windows. The windows dissapearing on undock is also a problem. I have to say though, that the chap who made that video kind of missed the point of a unified inventory, but nevermind.

So long as the window refresh is fixed I dont see any reason to delay the release. From the video I see far more pros than cons for introducing the new system. As a disclaimer though I've not been using SiSi, so I only see the problems people show on videos.


I can see how many, even most EVE players, would have none or very few issues with the new inventory. If all your item-manipulating work consists of looting wrecks and dumping the loot in a station to later sell, maybe occasionally fitting a ship or two, then the new window is just fine (And by that I mean no offense.)

However for people who have to regularly manage corporation and alliance assets, POSes, doing heavy duty logistics, and so on, the new system is basically unusable. Many CSM representatives have a background in 0.0 or other major alliances, I am sure they would understand if they tried to use the new UI. And I believe that we spreadsheet masters have as much right to have a functional UI as anyone else.


There are also issues with looting wrecks.

Since window position and size is not maintained, the old trick where you'd open a ton of wrecks and they'd stack up allowing you to spam the "loot-all" button no longer exists.




You do realzie that your discussing things on a test server right?
This doesn't necessarily mean or preclude what you see there is what will be on Tranq when time comes.

================ STOP THE EVEMAIL SPAM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#14 - 2012-05-21 19:16:19 UTC
Drake Draconis wrote:
You do realzie that your discussing things on a test server right?
This doesn't necessarily mean or preclude what you see there is what will be on Tranq when time comes.


I believe that the issue is that the patch is rolling out in <24h and there have been no indications that it will be on TQ in any form other than the patch, especially since Devs seem less than willing to actually listen to the feedback about usability issues (hint: "you'll get used to it" isn't a good response to valid concerns being voiced).

I too hope that whatever shows up on TQ works well and causes no issues. However, all indications are to the contrary and the dev communication has been less than satisfactory. I think most people want to be optimistic about it, but what he have seen to date has not been encouraging.
Dawn Flare
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2012-05-21 19:24:23 UTC
Drake Draconis wrote:
You do realzie that your discussing things on a test server right?
This doesn't necessarily mean or preclude what you see there is what will be on Tranq when time comes.

I see you are not familiar withb the CCP test server.

Numbers might change, but major issues like these never do. They are ALWAYS put on the test server before going live(or nothing is touched at all, giving no warning whatsoever that there will be a change)
Drake Draconis
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2012-05-21 20:14:21 UTC
Dawn Flare wrote:
Drake Draconis wrote:
You do realzie that your discussing things on a test server right?
This doesn't necessarily mean or preclude what you see there is what will be on Tranq when time comes.

I see you are not familiar withb the CCP test server.

Numbers might change, but major issues like these never do. They are ALWAYS put on the test server before going live(or nothing is touched at all, giving no warning whatsoever that there will be a change)


I see you are unfamilar with history.

They have put and removed features on the test server days before release.

================ STOP THE EVEMAIL SPAM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152
Angry Onions
League of Angered Gentlemen
#17 - 2012-05-21 21:46:57 UTC
New inventory system works fine, everyone needs to stop their bitching. Once I familiarized myself with the new system (a grand five minutes total) it has been working amazingly well. I hope to see this on TQ soon.

S H I T P O S T I N G
Drake Draconis
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2012-05-21 22:40:13 UTC
Just so you guys get the picture.... I'm not saying theres a problem...or theres no problem.

I'm saying this is a test server....that means its not concrete....don't assume everything on sisi will carry over.

Even then...typically no ones going to really raise a ruckus until its gone live...and sometimes...you just can't win any arguments with the dev's until the larger audience picks up.

Keep in mind....SISI is a Beta test server....so take everything you see there with a bit of salt.Cool

================ STOP THE EVEMAIL SPAM! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=78152
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-05-21 23:16:26 UTC
Angry Onions wrote:
New inventory system works fine, everyone needs to stop their bitching. Once I familiarized myself with the new system (a grand five minutes total) it has been working amazingly well. I hope to see this on TQ soon.


You sir, need to watch the video.

I am quoting you as I will come back to this post in a week and ask you to please restate this claim with a straight face.

Yes, the new inventory system is the right idea. However, it's current state is not going to make people happy. AT ALL.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-05-21 23:18:17 UTC
Drake Draconis wrote:
Just so you guys get the picture.... I'm not saying theres a problem...or theres no problem.

I'm saying this is a test server....that means its not concrete....don't assume everything on sisi will carry over.

Even then...typically no ones going to really raise a ruckus until its gone live...and sometimes...you just can't win any arguments with the dev's until the larger audience picks up.

Keep in mind....SISI is a Beta test server....so take everything you see there with a bit of salt.Cool



With a patch hours away and the response from the Dev team. I'm going to imagine that it is how it is since they haven't had a chance to test any additional changes to modifications in the inventory code.

It would be a very bad idea, hours before a major patch launch to add core code to a system that hasn't been tested.

See: Boot.ini

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
123Next page