EVE Information Portal

You see CCP? This sort of under the hood but beneficial fixing of problems is what we want before you start selling us bling. The last few dev blogs have been very promising in terms of what Hilmars letter of contrition a few days ago said was coming. I'm actually beginning to believe that there is a real change in priorities up there in Iceland. Keep it up.

I would put this as a priority, having a default but selectable download location is mandatory for this game now.

Some of us like to have a small (or even FAT32) C: drive just in case a virus or Microsoft update causes a major problem with the operating system, it is then easy to wipe and re-install without loosing all our work etc.

My download manager always has a default to a selectable location and will ask and check if you would like to change this before a download commences, please put this in soonest.

I would like to see a md5/SHA-1 for the offline exe installer/7z dumps, also if you want, a torrent would be even better. you could use 2 very legal and free open source trackers:

udp://tracker.publicbt.com:80/announce

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce

with superseeding ensuring that everyone could download Eve online.

I don't know about everyone else, but i would seed forever.

Should be interesting to see where this goes.

/c

My concern isn't so much how things get patched and downloaded (i've never had a problem before except with sisi, and sisilauncher.exe made that much better.) I'm more concerned with WHY exactly the download is 4.5 gigs? Wasn't the download something like 200 megs a few short years ago? Looks like a lot of bloat to me. I would be interested in seeing a graph of the download size since launch (maybe overlayed with a graph of the installed+cache size.) Maybe also overlay that with a graph of standard $ cost of disk space over the same time period, and the cost of internet bandwidth. Would also be interesting to mark the graph with major expansions and patches (let the players come to a conclusion for themselves if the bloat has been worth it.)

Dude, don't judge others by yourself.
If game installer failed free space check and failed install process - that is bad installer, not the bad customer.
"Stupid users" it's not the right excuse for bad design when you trying to increase your playerbase. You must deal with all scenarios or user will drop EVE without even trying .

Does it work under Wine ?

You ******. I had to log in so I could like this post.

I think you need a better name for the generic patcher, something that stands out.
For god's sake man, this is real space pixel we're talking about. Where's your sense of flair and style?

Let me start, how about :

FixMe™

or

WorkingDisaster™

or

WarpDriveInactive™

or

Alice™ ... I like the sound of Alyssandra™ better though.

Good Move !
As far as i understand this is well established methodology from SISI .... but it fits well for Liveserver as well.

Nevertheless i would suggest that you provide a third mode for updating:

1.) updater retrieves installed client version number and checks with the currently active version code from CDN
if they match => no update needed installed version is valid

This what the updater already does to my understanding

if they dont match => my proposal would be, the CDN checks if the submitted to-be-updated version is already known by it, meaning there is already the list of blocks known how to patch version A into the currently valid version B

if the list of blocks is already known the CDN sends it to the updater. The updater doesn't need to do the checksum analysis and doen't need to build the list for data blocks to be requested, but simply takes the list of patch blocks from the CDN

if the list of blocks is not already known for the specific version to be updated by CDN, then the updater behaves the same as SISI updater/repair does. It does it full file checksum analyses, verifies it with checksums lists from CDN and build a list of blocks to be requested and patched into the old version to update it to current.
In addition to patching the updater sends the block list for patching version A to B to CDN, so the next user doesnt need to it anymore and gets the block list from CDN server


Why should you implement this ?
cause doing the checksum analysis takes quite lot time, which for minor patches exceeds the download for the patch blocks.
You dont have to borther with 20 version patch builds or block lists anymore, this gets created by the users themself.

and if the strategy fails and CDN provides the wrong block list for whatever reason there is still method 3 of bruteforce analysis by the updater and creating its own block list.