These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Launcher update on May 21, 2013

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
vilya novacat
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2441 - 2013-05-22 20:03:24 UTC  |  Edited by: vilya novacat
Constructive feedback: Your launcher is coded even worse than the typical CCP product, and that takes some doing.

CCP Atropos wrote:
My hope is that in the end, you will be able to log into the EVE Launcher once, which downloads your settings from the cloud, with all of your accounts linked, via either a single EVE master account or via some other OAuth provider, and be able to select characters and switch between them at the click of a single button.

This is what we want. Until you get there, leave it the **** alone.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#2442 - 2013-05-22 20:05:32 UTC
Also, posting in a #firstworldproblems thread

.
Lord Haur
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#2443 - 2013-05-22 20:10:42 UTC
vilya novacat wrote:
Constructive feedback: Your launcher is coded even worse than the typical CCP product, and that takes some doing.

CCP Atropos wrote:
My hope is that in the end, you will be able to log into the EVE Launcher once, which downloads your settings from the cloud, with all of your accounts linked, via either a single EVE master account or via some other OAuth provider, and be able to select characters and switch between them at the click of a single button.

This is what we want. Until you get there, leave it the **** alone.

No, it's not. I don't want to have my client settings downloaded from the cloud. I use multiple client installs precisely to have multiple client settings per account.

Master account thing is a bit meh for me. Sounds great initially, slightly doubtful as to the actual pickup it'll have.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#2444 - 2013-05-22 20:11:52 UTC
Roime wrote:
Jysella Halcyon wrote:
Roime wrote:

This is not an issue with the launcher, disposable cyno alts for moving caps solo is a major game design error.


Yeah, like I'm going to trust another eve player to light a cyno for my 8B JF filled with 5B in cargo. Can you say "scam waiting to happen"?


I didn't blame players using cyno alts, I said that their existence is a game design error.

Or do you think that having to roll alts just to move your ship is an interesting and engaging game mechanic? Does it generate MMO sandbox content?

My view is that all the things that are currently externalized to alts should be revised, and designed either so that they benefit from real player vs/w player interaction, or solved by other mechanics that can be performed by a single character. Alts are workarounds that devalue characters and the sandbox and add nothing exciting to the game for the players.

DISCLAIMER: I also have two such alts, trained purely for PI so I can increase the number of planets from the rather insufficient six. I'd much rather increase the amount of planets per character for example with a skillbook, a blueprint from exploration, some POS module or hell, by hiring dusties to conquer some other player's colony. I hope this made my point clearer.


So you don't fly caps then......
Alex Fabio
Night Creatures
#2445 - 2013-05-22 20:13:15 UTC
Has anyone said when there is going to be a fix for the launcher problems?

Installed the update today and launcher wouldn't open.

Even after running the repair tool the launcher wont open and shows nothing in processes. Roll
Jysella Halcyon
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2446 - 2013-05-22 20:13:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jysella Halcyon
Roime wrote:

Or do you think that having to roll alts just to move your ship is an interesting and engaging game mechanic? Does it generate MMO sandbox content?


I would love to have capital movement somehow separated from the existing mechanic, but I don't have any idea how to do so without buffing capitals in a big way. The need for a beacon to lock on to when moving the largest and in many cases most capable of ships makes them reliant on subcapitals. This is good from a balance perspective, because it gives small groups a weak link to target in engaging with larger entities. That cynos are visible and warpable system-wide gives capital movement some of the same vulnerability as subcaps have when moving via gates.

If you have a better idea for this that doesn't make capitals winmobiles I and my 5 jump-capable accounts would be happy to hear it, but everything I can come up with falls short of current implementation on at least one facet.

The issue with extending (to use your example) PI via a skillbook or BPO or some drop or evern DUST integration is that a player with 2 characters doing the same PI will still double your output. As long as multiboxing is accepted (an I'm the first to laud the ability to do so if you wish, this is a sandbox) the per-character output needs to be kept in check.

With capital movement - take away the role of a subcap in giving capitals the gateway and you take away a role that a young player can fill and make a contribution to his corp in capital ops. I've spent plenty of time in moving ops sitting still with a cyno up while the older pilots move ships and materiel around. If I weren't there with a cyno that'd be one less JF or carrier moving stuff to our new home. Without the need for a cyno the blob gets one member bigger.
Katy Ling
Crimnson Concept Flame
#2447 - 2013-05-22 20:20:42 UTC
Muul Udonii wrote:
Constructive feedback to CCP regarding the launcher, it's deployment and the way they broke it:

1. The launcher was not broken, ergo there were no reasons to change it. The change has not improved anything for any player, therefore it should not have been deployed.

2. When I launch eve (i.e. what a launcher should do) I don't want to have to log in to the launcher first, then have it validate my client, then log out, then log in, then have it validate my client again, to launch a second instance of Eve.

3. Validation appears to take much longer now than it used to; presumably due to bad code

4. You should NEVER release anything where there are known problems, but also known (but unpublicised) workarounds. You should be making the game easy to at least log into, if not to play.

5. Don't bother releasing anything to the test server and asking for feedback, if you are just going to release a daft, and broken piece of code anyway.

6. Don't release an update that disrupts or changes in any significant way, how a player logs into the game. And don't do it 2 weeks before a large patch is due to be released.

7. Any update should change only the very minimal of my saved settings. Any update that changes things like chat windows, should automatically fail QA, even if there is an unpublished workaround.

8. Whoever made the call to release it, should not work for CCP. Tell the players who they are, and they will drive them out of the business so you don't have to fire them.

9. NEVER EVER tell your customer base to use a workaround. Fix your software rather than helping them avoid having to use it.



on one side, ccp seems to have smart people able to release smart content, on the other side, they seem to have a problem with who ever is managing this kind of scheduled releases.
it shows an attitude like :
"it's broken, but we have a deadline, so we release it anyway and fix it later"
... meanwhile, the players have to deal with the problems for weeks or months until it's fixed properly.

last year, they released the new inventory UI, despite many warnings it was broken, they went ahead anyway, without any regards that players have to work with those buggy systems and endure the displeasure of such problems.

once again, you should not have released something with bugs that prevent people from playing the game normally, especially when the previous version was working fine and you replace it for something not working properly.

but does that really matter to you ?
do you really care about our feedback ?
because we have warned you in the past, of broken content and you still released it anyway.
worst part is that you continue to have a similar attitude, releasing broken content to replace perfectly fine working systems.
we (costumers) don't like that.

but does any of this comments really matter to you (ccp)!?
i suppose it doesn't ...
"shut up and take my money !" is way more appealing to you, of course ...
... how about "check you're s**t before releasing it !? "

us, costumers would appreciate and thank you a lot more, for actually taking what ever time is necessary to release things with less game crippling bugs.
Endeis
Reckless-Endangerment
Manifesto.
#2448 - 2013-05-22 20:20:43 UTC
Validating client takes 6 years. Old launcher was totally fine, this one adds nothing. If it aint broke, dont fix it! Evil
Amarrius Ibn Pontificus
Legion Air
#2449 - 2013-05-22 20:25:35 UTC
Jysella Halcyon wrote:
Roime wrote:

Or do you think that having to roll alts just to move your ship is an interesting and engaging game mechanic? Does it generate MMO sandbox content?


I would love to have capital movement somehow separated from the existing mechanic, but I don't have any idea how to do so without buffing capitals in a big way. The need for a beacon to lock on to when moving the largest and in many cases most capable of ships makes them reliant on subcapitals. This is good from a balance perspective, because it gives small groups a weak link to target in engaging with larger entities. That cynos are visible and warpable system-wide gives capital movement some of the same vulnerability as subcaps have when moving via gates.

If you have a better idea for this that doesn't make capitals winmobiles I and my 5 jump-capable accounts would be happy to hear it, but everything I can come up with falls short of current implementation on at least one facet.


A ship-like controlable drone that's released from the cap ship doing what alt cynos do, maybe? I dunno, Subscriptions might drop and CCP income would drop with it as well because then you no longer need a cyno acc. And wrong thread for that debate anyway.

This is about CCP greifing the player base. Only players are allwed to do that to their peers.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#2450 - 2013-05-22 20:27:08 UTC
To quote from someones sig, I saw earlier:

CCP: If it works, break it. If its broken, ignore it.


Priceless
Sacha Asanari
Torchwood Technologies
#2451 - 2013-05-22 20:30:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Sacha Asanari
This launcher update sucks. It takes longer to load, and breaks half the time. Almost impossible to run two accounts on the same computer. Repeatedly have to reboot computer to reset launcher. As someone else mentioned earlier, you now have to go through a two step login vs. one, which makes no sense whatsoever. Why the hell did you guys do this?

And this isn't some online free MMO. I PAY for this every month, x 4 by the way. Very unhappy.
Onion Ring
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2452 - 2013-05-22 20:30:54 UTC
Quote:
but does that really matter to you ?
do you really care about our feedback ?
because we have warned you in the past, of broken content and you still released it anyway.
worst part is that you continue to have a similar attitude, releasing broken content to replace perfectly fine working systems.
we (costumers) don't like that.



Sounds like an apology job for Hilmar again...if he can find some time...i hope he already knows about the problems of players not being able to even enter his great game...

Until then maybe we have to write a few more posts to this thread until the database explodes.

If a problem thread reached more than 500 posts where players can't login, i would expect all CCP to be awake and coding and informing players left and right.

But now we passed 2500 posts or something and i don't feel like a customer, but a beta tester. AND IT IS STILL DEPLOYED AND DOESNT WORK FOR EVERYONE.
bingbing Audeles
Nuwa Foundation
Fraternity.
#2453 - 2013-05-22 20:35:54 UTC
I WANT MY LOGIN SCREEN BACK !
I WANT TO HEAR THE SEXY "CONNECTING" SOUND!!
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#2454 - 2013-05-22 20:37:32 UTC
Nah, Hilmar is busy feeding money to that "space elevator" guy we had seen on fanfest. To make Eve REAL. Because making game work is not REAL enough.

Invalid signature format
Onion Ring
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2455 - 2013-05-22 20:41:23 UTC
For the interested player:


CCP Atropos wrote:
For the moment the old method of logging into the client will remain, but in the long term we're intending to remove it. The old method doesn't fit with our plans to improve accessibility to the EVE Universe and with improvements to security such as two-factor authentication.



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3047366#post3047366
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#2456 - 2013-05-22 20:45:47 UTC
bingbing Audeles wrote:
I WANT MY LOGIN SCREEN BACK !
I WANT TO HEAR THE SEXY "CONNECTING" SOUND!!


simply start ExeFile.exe like in good old times... thats what i'm doing now.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#2457 - 2013-05-22 20:46:56 UTC
Jysella Halcyon wrote:
Roime wrote:

Or do you think that having to roll alts just to move your ship is an interesting and engaging game mechanic? Does it generate MMO sandbox content?


I would love to have capital movement somehow separated from the existing mechanic, but I don't have any idea how to do so without buffing capitals in a big way. The need for a beacon to lock on to when moving the largest and in many cases most capable of ships makes them reliant on subcapitals. This is good from a balance perspective, because it gives small groups a weak link to target in engaging with larger entities. That cynos are visible and warpable system-wide gives capital movement some of the same vulnerability as subcaps have when moving via gates.

If you have a better idea for this that doesn't make capitals winmobiles I and my 5 jump-capable accounts would be happy to hear it, but everything I can come up with falls short of current implementation on at least one facet.


If I had a solid suggestion how to fix that I would have no doubt posted it already :)

One part of the problem is that the same mechanic is used for dramatically different purposes- cargo logistics, primary movement of capital ships and bridging small gangs and fleets. Perhaps a good start would be to separate jump freighters from offensive uses.

.
Hippocrene
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2458 - 2013-05-22 20:47:10 UTC
Ye Gods. I couldn't bear to watch the validating client line creeping slowly towards the right any longer ... I'm not a young man anymore.
Ugo Mnoguron
Un4seen Development
Goonswarm Federation
#2459 - 2013-05-22 20:51:09 UTC
I think such fail deployments serve a unique purpose:

TO IDENTIFY EVE'S HARDCORE PLAYERS

If you're like the developers involved in this nonsense, you would have a single account with maybe one Jita dwelling alt used for market checking purposes, in which case, this thread doesn't concern to you.

TBH, the only thing well done was the awakening of the most sensitive segment of the EVE community in total rage for this being the most demotivating prelude to an expansion I've seen in my 5yrs playing this game.

The entrance to the game was ruined!.. How can it be messed up any worse!

I understand that CCP is pushing the marketing on re-selling the game over and over again to it's same player base. And I don't disagree.. Apparently there are many who want to have a full house within the game.

EVE players don't want anything back.. no previous log in system, single crap log in, etc. EVE players want this to work!... PLAIN AND SIMPLE. So, go back to your drafts, throw them all away and re-do the thing with your beloved hardcore player base in mind before your marketing strategy collapses. Those who want to that full house within the game already have it. If you think anyone is considering re-buying your game with this crap by acquiring more accounts/alts, you're in the wrong business!

This... thing that was done, acts opposite to the merchandising goal and marketing strategy.

Selling EVE to newcomers is hard: It's an aggressive in-game environment and the learning curve is an indigestion for most.

NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN SELL THIS TO YOURSELVES
Ice Nomad
Nomadic Industrial Corporation
#2460 - 2013-05-22 20:55:27 UTC
Onion Ring wrote:
For the interested player:


CCP Atropos wrote:
For the moment the old method of logging into the client will remain, but in the long term we're intending to remove it. The old method doesn't fit with our plans to improve accessibility to the EVE Universe and with improvements to security such as two-factor authentication.



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3047366#post3047366



Got all happy cause I got EVE working again the way it should with the shortcut from the bin folder. But after reading that no point in undoing the sub cancellations. It may take months or even years to get the new launcher friendly and usable for multi account use. Good luck guys and keep working on it CCP great game will keep eyes out for updates and improvements