EVE General Discussion

The thing is, I don't trust either CCP or the community to make that work in a remotely sane way, and the default UI needs a whole bunch of options anyway.

It's wasted since it could have been done in step 3, rather than [ willfully | ignorantly ] creating steps 6 and 7. The entire issue brought up by this thread is that they kind of promised that this exact thing wouldn't happen again…

…hence why people are so willing to bring out the big guns from the last time it happened.

Oh, you misunderstood. I have no doubts that the community could make spectacular mods.

My worry is with that “sane“ part. The separation between haves and have-nots would be insane. The advantages gained would be insane. The meta-gaming angle would be insane. The abuse would be insane.

Just because they'd be spectacular doesn't mean they'd be good for the game — quite the opposite — and in a competitive game such as EVE, this would be a far bigger issue than a frigate-blapping titan blobs raised to the power of tech moons times T20.

also for anybody who hasn't the post linked in Jebediah MacAhab Dallocorts sig is well worth a read

Yep, that's what we call a "smart thing to do". I mean, look at Bethesda. They've been milking the player mods for their games since Morrowind, back in 2002. Release game, give users ability to tweak things. A few years later collect the best mods. Stick them into the game. Pretty up the game, update Elder Scrolls counter by +1 and rake in millions of dollars in revenue.

That's the basic difference between "we design the game the way we want, and to hell with you or the consequences!" and "how can we expand our player base and make more money?" And no, forcing people to battle a horrible UI nobody wanted is not how you get more players, it's how you lose whatever you have left.

I agree completely with you on the T2 manufacturing - there is simply no fun in it now. Since every T2 manufacturer is going through this pain production is inevitably going to fall. The obvious solution from our side as manufacturers is to take account of the coming T2 price rises and start speculating on the T2 market now, instead of wasting our time navigating menus. This will push up T2 prices even more of course, but the Shift-Clickers are obviously willing to pay higher prices.

If the prices of T2 ships were set not by the cost of their underlying components but by the number of clicks now required to build them, prices will be going through the rood. Up by an order of magnitude. And "shift-click will fix it" won't fix it. Shift-click is the final step in a process that also involves navigating through several levels of menus, window resizing, and high-precision scrollbarring, before you can even locate the place you need to shift-click on. All to do what you used to be able to do with one click. We're then dismissed as whiners by people who have to do this once or twice in a station, not realizing that the things they are shift-clicking on already required hundreds of clicks to manufacture and trade before the expansion.

The only thing I disagree with you on is making the new UI optional. It's the right idea, but they had to do that last year with CQ. From a corporate point of view CCP shareholders are going to be less than impressed with two years in a row where the new product forced the company to spend extra money on retro-fitting an optional roll-back. So while it's the right idea, its probably not going to happen this year (and will probably lead to sackings if it does).

Kasriel,

what you are asking for is understandable. You want an option to either turn on a Unified Inventory system or turn it off and it reverts back to the old system.

I am no programmer or developer myself, but please be aware that what you are asking for is likley going to be a huge undertaking as far as coding is concerned.

It's quite simple really. We had an old way and now a new method.

However, not only does the game needs to register everyone's equipment and inventory, but it also needs to do the same thing twice. Should your proposal be implemented, that is. I've been playing MMO's for the past 8 years now and al the time developers struggle with this problem in various games. If something new is created and players do not want it, can we get to a system where its possible to have both working in the game? The answer is likely a yes every single time. But the cost? A huge congestion of information being sent from server to client, creating lag issues across the board and thereby making the overall system sluggish to work with.

Suppose CCP implements your suggestion and they make an improvement to the UI by allowing you to click on several different items and then sell them in one go (mass-selling). This feature needs to be developed and implemented two times. What you are asking for is a double workload of the same amount of developers.

What do you think will happen with the chance of errors between both versions? Do you also realize what the result will be should another additional add-on be added on top of this? It's almost as if a new game is being developed because it simply needs to take into account that information on how the inventory is stored is handled in a different manner in each preference. The end result is a sluggish game mechanic that becomes even more horrible as time progresses and new options are being added for both versions, which could potentially create additional spin-offs as well to accomodate player feedback.

I know change is not something many players like. Hell I did a course on "human resistance to change" in my Human Resource Management major. But CCP did a very good job in trying to accommodate all players that want the old system back. They still can in fact. Sort of. Simply SHIFT+left click on a tree section (for instance your ship hanger, or items hanger) and it will create a new tab with just the items in that particular tree section.

Now, of course CCP needs to make sure that the inventory screens that players create do not bug out (size changes back to default, or it needs to be manually opened again each time etc.) This is being worked on as we speak. But that's the best thing CCP can do. Adding the option like you suggest is not a good solution. It would make the game sluggish and more susceptive to errors.

Do you ever build t2?

5 days later and still no fix. Nice to see them listening. I have 1 acount expiring on Monday and the rest will shortly follow. This is no longer about the change to the inventory for me. I get better customer service from my phone compnay, cable provider and pretty much everyone else I can think of. Hell I got better customer service from a crack dealer on the street back in the 90's. This game has become a way to make money for ccp and nothing more. They do not care what you think. That is obvious by the huge response we have seen to all the comments and rage people have expressed over this inventory change. My $115/month will be better used somewhere else. Maybe I'll take up Diablo 3, I know Blizzard listens to their customers (more then they ignor them)




ps. Go **** yourself CCP

I'm trying to figure out HOW any one can love this new PITA so-called inventory system.

I'm guessing you folks rarely or never do any serious amount of inventory management for a CORPORATION.

For those of us that have to do a LOT of inventory management in a typical play session, this new interface is a NIGHTMARE.

But its oh so great if one only does PvP. No problems at all.

Feel that wind direction blowing HARD.