These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

"Load Station Environment" option removed?

First post
Author
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#41 - 2016-04-05 10:42:18 UTC
Thanks. After having a look, the short version is that you're running on a machine that's below our min spec, but I see a few things you could change in your settings that would probably help. I'll email in-game with details.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins

Jeb Ashimura
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2016-04-05 21:53:10 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
So, what you are saying is I have to ruin my in-space game to get reasonable fps when docked. That's bad design. I should not have to make that decision.

I'm really curious about the specifics of what's going on for you. The hangar scene is a lot less heavy than anything you will see while undocked.

I know that you specifically asked Vincent, but I'd like to provide additional data based on my MacBook Pro running three clients simultaneously. That machine definitely exceeds CCP's minimum specs.

While docked, all clients easily show 30-40 fps with low graphics settings. The big problem is that all three clients require the high performance mobile GPU, and also full CPU power -- both shown by the OS X activity monitor -- even when the "hide" function is used to minimize the UI. This is burning battery power like crazy, even if the clients are not doing anything but displaying some chat windows. A minimized/hidden EVE client should not require a 3D mobile GPU and big chunks of CPU when it does nothing but keep a server connection alive, by sending a few data packets back and forth. No hangar eye candy is worth this amount of energy consumption.
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#43 - 2016-04-06 00:50:20 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Darwin
Jeb Ashimura wrote:
A minimized/hidden EVE client should not require a 3D mobile GPU and big chunks of CPU

I agree, and my experience is that minimized clients are a lot better behaved on Windows than what you describe as your Mac experience. This may be a limitation of the Cider &/or Wine compatibility layer or something we're doing to enable Eve to work with that layer. I have a Mac dual-GPU laptop myself at home and I'll do a little testing with multiple clients to see if I experience similar issues.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins

Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
#44 - 2016-04-06 01:04:09 UTC
For those who have issues and don't want to mess up their map view, you can also look at the Ship Tree to reducing rendering load. It's super annoying, but better than nothing.
Sky Marshal
Core Industry.
Blades of Grass
#45 - 2016-04-19 02:54:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Sky Marshal
CCP Darwin wrote:
Our minimum specification today (which has been in place since 2013, as I write this) corresponds to a typical gaming computer from mid-2007 for Windows or about 2010 for Mac, which is old enough that continued operating system support will soon start to be an issue for owners of those systems, and that can be an issue for us too, because our development tools must support operating systems that work on those computers as well.

We do not actively prevent Eve from running on computers that do not meet our minimum specification, so if your gameplay is of a style that's tolerant of performance that's below our standards, you may find that such a system continues to work for you after it's no longer supported. (Note, however, that occasionally we may make changes, such as our current plan to retire the old launcher June 30th, that affect Eve's software support for older operating systems. This is unavoidable.)

So take comfort that we don't make these decisions lightly, and if your favorite computer for playing Eve is adversely impacted by this change, I'm sorry, but I hope you can find an alternative that allows you to stick with us.

The problem is not really if the hardware can't or can support it, it is about if it is a good idea to do it or not.

I have a Radeon HD7870 so my GPU can support it and even the Captain's Quarter if I want to go in. But most of my time in this game is in a station, sometimes with multiple accounts... So obviously it is not a good idea to stress the GPU and waste electricity (and so real money) just to follow trade orders, wait for fleet or chatting. I didn't have to hear the GPU fan before you removed this option and I am already in low settings, no transparency, no damn blurring effect who was an eye strain, etc. just for the sake to NOT make my GPU work for nothing. I just have to reactivate decent details when needed.

In fact, the real problem is that EVE requires more power INSIDE than OUTSIDE a station (in non-battle situations). That don't make any sense as there is only one ship to render apart for the non-accurate part of the background where you see ships moving and I don't understand it myself.

Maybe you can make things simple, like just... not render the ship or the element who ask for power when this option is active, while keeping the 3d engine online. Or make sure that the station is really well optimized.

Amarrius Ibn Pontificus wrote:
And over time, with all those incremental changes, I do wonder the real weight that also has on your player base. Sure anough many such people will upgrade their hardware or buy a new computer. But not everyone can. We're still under the effect of a financial crisis and while the original intent behind PLEX was a different one, the data seems to point that not everyone can (or is at least willing) to spend real money to sub their accounts, much less invest on a new or renewed computer.

You can include the "small details" who seems to be nothing individually, but when accumulated become a serious annoyance for this game. For exemple, the "Selected item" window has to take a serious amount of space if I want to have big interactable icons inside all the time, just because CCP thought that this icons should not be displayed on two or more rows (like this exemple) and so they made their size automatically adjusted to be sure that they remain on one row only, with no options to keep the old (better) way. A bad decision they made since 2007... or how waste monitor space for nothing while making the usage of this window slightly harder. Also, I wonder how much players are inpacted by the bubble of light and thunders who appear sometimes in the middle of stargates (I mean THIS) because I am annoyed by them each time. Sometimes I cover the screen with the wallet window, especialy after XX jumps... I know that the EULA has a seizure warning for "rare" instances, but is it a valid reason to create effects who will voluntary provoke them without any way to disable them (and I think that stargates aren't "rare" instances) ? I can continue for long...

The amount of small annoying details and the reduction of his accessibility (RGB sliders removed, neocom without colored icons, etc.) make me wonder sometimes why I still play at this game as they seriously affect my gameplay. Well, I did leave for some months multiple times but I really like this game, not CCP... I guess that some players did decide to leave for good.



For the moment, well... I just disable the new map and I guess that I will have to get the reflex to use it as a sort of Gpu-Saver. After all, CCP « have concluded that we do not plan to do so » ...
Idame Isqua
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#46 - 2016-05-10 10:31:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Idame Isqua
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
For those who have issues and don't want to mess up their map view, you can also look at the Ship Tree to reducing rendering load. It's super annoying, but better than nothing.



Hey CCP my macbook air is now dead
Not blaming you
But now I can't eve unless I'm at home

IMO CCP dosn't understand the issue
Players don't want extra "features" that don't do anything
It sounds like your ignoring a lot of what we are saying
Without explaining whats so hard about having a clear cut static background minimum resource draw.

Heres another example of why this was is a bad move big issue
Tonnnnns of people have multiple clients open while running other games

O wait I think the important point here is
Lots of people play eve with more than one monitor
Maybe trading chatting waiting for stuff to happen docked in station while watching a movie or playing another game or anything.
At the end of the day you just hugely increased the resource lord on your customers systems for zero benefit to them.

IDK personally I'm totally against making market trading a 100% offline event.
But I guess you will figure out whats good for the game once none is in local in major trade hubs
And daily logged in numbers significantly drop

Personally CCPs responses to this issue combined with your response to the lack of LP implementation.
"Your not a priority, not because you lack merit, but because you lack socio-political salt and hate" Has soured my view of CCP.

Testing out using ISIS as a background ty missy
Industrial Madness
Ouroboros Orbital Infrastructure
#47 - 2016-05-13 18:49:18 UTC
Thank you for explaining CCP Darwin. Though I’m sure you’d prefer we just leave this issue be I feel I also need to chime in.

I have a feeling that this is something quite a lot of people noticed and found irritating, but just haven’t voiced an opinion on; but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be worth spending a tiny fraction of development resources to make their experience that bit better.

As you can see from people asking for a black screen we aren’t looking for anything fancy, something that would take 1 maybe 2 days of dev time tops.

If you felt you had to keep it within the lore etc. someone could make a simple background saying something along the lines of “External Camera Drones offline. No other feeds detected. Ocular input disabled”

10 minutes on Photoshop for one of the art guys (maybe an hour if they want to make it look snazzy), a few hours programing, and a few hours making sure it scales with different display resolutions. If you really wanted to go all out an extra day to get that sentence translated for all the different client languages and a bit of QA testing to make sure it’s colour-blind friendly.

That’s it, job done for the foreseeable future, no maintenance required.


Please?
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
#48 - 2016-05-18 05:45:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
CCP Darwin wrote:
we do not plan to do so.

Crushing all the dreams with a hammer made of heart shattering NO.


Industrial Madness wrote:
That’s it, job done for the foreseeable future, no maintenance required.

Please?

Cant you see?

NO.

Why?
You will not understand, because its inconceivable to you all, that is why. Pirate
Now pray for something else!
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#49 - 2016-05-18 15:04:10 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Thanks. After having a look, the short version is that you're running on a machine that's below our min spec, but I see a few things you could change in your settings that would probably help. I'll email in-game with details.

I'm not sure I replied to this in another thread, but you are not seeing my machine. I'm on a Mac using the new Wine wrapper, and that is hiding the machine I'm really on. Its a 17 inch MacBook Pro.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#50 - 2016-05-20 19:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
It seems really bizarre to me that my computer works harder with five clients docked than it does with five clients out in space. I've started going AFK cloaked in space because otherwise my computer puts out so much heat that the AC in my house has to run continuously.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Jeb Ashimura
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2016-05-21 23:59:49 UTC
Any news on this? If CCP resists the idea of a static hangar background, for whatever reason, how about limiting the hangar interior to one frame per second? I doubt this is less hassle than a static background, but there must be something you guys can do to avoid this utter waste of energy caused by GPUs running hot for naught.

Again: the dynamic hangar adds nothing whatsoever to my personal experience of EVE, other than tons of annoyance about the shockingly bad performance. If CCP stubbornly insists on doing the dynamic hangar, at least do it right in terms of performance.
Eris Tsasa
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#52 - 2016-05-22 00:07:54 UTC
Has anyone asked about the fact they couldn't devote resources to continue being able to load a static image of the station interior to help their customers but they can maintain the animated and annoying billboards/ad's inside stations?
CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#53 - 2016-05-25 11:08:05 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:

I'm not sure I replied to this in another thread, but you are not seeing my machine. I'm on a Mac using the new Wine wrapper, and that is hiding the machine I'm really on. Its a 17 inch MacBook Pro.

Yeah, sorry, we're still working out how to get better reporting of system specs via our Wine wrapper. The most recent 17" MBP is still a pretty modest machine for Eve and I believe turning down your settings should be something to consider.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins

CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#54 - 2016-05-25 11:13:33 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
It seems really bizarre to me that my computer works harder with five clients docked than it does with five clients out in space. I've started going AFK cloaked in space because otherwise my computer puts out so much heat that the AC in my house has to run continuously.

Are all five clients visible at once? If four of them are minimized, they shouldn't be contributing to your load.

That said, the hangar scenes are somewhat heavier than in-space scenes because you're surrounded by geometry which has physically-based-rendering shaders applied. Turning your shader quality to "Low" for a few clients might help.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#55 - 2016-05-25 13:27:12 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:

I'm not sure I replied to this in another thread, but you are not seeing my machine. I'm on a Mac using the new Wine wrapper, and that is hiding the machine I'm really on. Its a 17 inch MacBook Pro.

Yeah, sorry, we're still working out how to get better reporting of system specs via our Wine wrapper. The most recent 17" MBP is still a pretty modest machine for Eve and I believe turning down your settings should be something to consider.

Ive turned down things about as far as they can go. With three clients, its on the edge of unplayable, even for mining. The thing is, its worse than it was a year ago. You are going backwards in terms of improving things.
As soon as Apple comes out with a new 17" laptop, I'll get it.

BTW, the main reason it gets unplayable is low frame rate seems to reduce client responsiveness. For example, right click in space, wait for menu. Slide to my travel list, wait for a sub-menu. Slide to my station, wait for menu. Slide to "Dock", wait for it to highlight. Its all that waiting that is annoying. Its like the client is saying "I'm too busy making a space scene to look at where the mouse is". Well, I would much rather have it look at where the mouse is than make a space scene. Is there anything you can do to keep the client responsiveness constant, irrelevant of frame rate? Somehow divorce the two?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#56 - 2016-05-25 13:47:06 UTC
Station performance has taken a hit for me after I upgraded to win10. Static environment or a more efficient scene would be quite welcome.

(Also, huge advertisement billboards with moving pictures and dozens of blinking lights makes it really annoying to have the game up on a second monitor.)
Leucy Kerastase
650BN
#57 - 2016-05-25 15:09:50 UTC
I really wouldn't mind if you (CCP) just gave us back "the door," though I guess that probably still wouldn't be free from the problem of increased QA load for you.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#58 - 2016-05-25 17:43:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
How about implementing the exterior view for all stations, not just citadels? That will use less graphics, especially if I zoom all the way out. Also, the exterior view is something you have already coded, committed to, and do regression tests on, so its not an extra QA burden.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Technobizzmo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#59 - 2016-06-04 16:16:53 UTC
Wow just came back to this game and this sucks. I find it hard to believe that something so simple would be such a problem for the Dev team. I will not be renewing the subscription due to this slow station environment. That was my fav part of the game, sitting in station and messing around with stuff. Now it's impossible without upgrading my PC. No way...
Technobizzmo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#60 - 2016-06-04 16:25:07 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
It seems really bizarre to me that my computer works harder with five clients docked than it does with five clients out in space. I've started going AFK cloaked in space because otherwise my computer puts out so much heat that the AC in my house has to run continuously.

Are all five clients visible at once? If four of them are minimized, they shouldn't be contributing to your load.

That said, the hangar scenes are somewhat heavier than in-space scenes because you're surrounded by geometry which has physically-based-rendering shaders applied. Turning your shader quality to "Low" for a few clients might help.



I find your answers annoying and useless. We know how to increase performance by farting around with settings. The problem is your team has cut out an important option. The biggest part of eve IMO is sitting in station "preparing" things. This will cause people to not use Eve as much due to performance drop across the board. I also find it annoying you say this is a problem for the Dev team. To me, this seems like a simple option to maintain. This needs to be fixed, and whoever's idea it was to drop this option should be fired.