These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The new launcher and the web server issues on the 21st of May: FAQ and update thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Niding
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#801 - 2013-06-25 03:17:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Niding
With the /bin exe file and the last version of the launcher before the current one you could fire up several client windows
right off the bat with no real delay.
And use the mouse to copy paste passwords etc.

Now its several clicks with mouse plus having to use keyboard for password copypasting.

As its built now I dont really see any directional change that will remedy the core designflaw that makes the launcher
a pain to use. Pretty to look at (which beyond the first time you look at it; is of no intrest since you want to log into the game),
but clunky and ackward beyond words.

Its almost like you dont want us to use multiple accounts with ease. If you want us to only use ONE account at a time then
say so clearly, but I think alot of CCPs income is coming from players like me that have more than 2 and 3 accounts
and have enjoyed the amazing ease of logging in.

I have had nothing but pleasant expirience logging in thru the client since I started in 2006, so I guess I should
applaud you for managing to undo that in 1 go.

Ofcourse, if the intent is to reduce the load onto the server by "forcing" people to give up on multi accounting,
then you defintly are on the right path.
The problem is just that people giving up multiaccounting might just sell off characters and focus on 1 or 2 accounts max, instead of the "hordes" some/many have.

In that case, well done!
eric textme
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#802 - 2013-06-25 07:08:35 UTC
agreed, get the F rid of this launcher, you know what they say: if it aint broke, dont fix it.

well it wasnt, and you did, now it is lmao
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#803 - 2013-06-25 08:56:07 UTC
As a preface, I’m glad you wrote this (and subsequent posts). When I, and I dare the guess that I am not the only one, have grown increasingly hostile and confrontational through the ordeal, it has in a major part been because of being ignored. Now that changes, so should the detractors’ confrontational reactions change.
For my part, I see this and subsequent posts as an outstretched hand. Thanks for that, and my apologies for my earlier “barbwire”-posts.
Quote:
Is the design of the EVE Launcher perfect? No.
Will you be fixing it? Yes.
When? When it's ready.
Why don't you roll it back then? Rolling back isn't an option, due to the integration with Steam and other OAuth providers.
(...)
We've done the initial transition to move people out of the client based login paradigm. It wasn't a flawless transition by any means, and there is still work to be done for those who are unable to login via the EVE Launcher (for example, those with the -324 browser issue) but we're working on those issues.
I know you have worked on the bugs – and general release related issues – since release. I do think a significant amount of it could have been avoided, and I will get back to you when my time travel machine becomes operational. Until that happens...
I have also been made aware that a rollback isn’t possible. I’m not a programmer so I thought for a while that the launcher and the game are separate enough for a “swap” of launcher (With the increased redundancy that enables such a swap). Those more knowledgeable than I have explained exactly why that is impossible.
Contrary to the bugs on release, however, what I did not see you work on or, until now, acknowledge, was some of the issues seemingly inherent in the design. Adding to this was, of course, a history with CCP that for some time has been marred with bad QA / use case testing, not listening to the community and going for “it will be awesome” over “it currently works”.

Quote:
You seem intent on criticising our decision to move the login out of the ExeFile.exe application, and from your repeated posts you cite poor decisions regarding web based logons, the removal of iconic features such as the landing page and splash screen, and the ability to run multiple accounts at the same time. (...)
Just so it’s on record: I am not in love with a particular .exe file. I think this summary is fair, if a little short and I will get back to it after you have addressed these concerns.

Quote:
(...) the old version of the EVE Launcher had a reliance upon the same web-servers that you're complaining about (...)
Pardon me if I am wrong, but the old Launcher only relied on the web-services if you had it stay open after launching, or if there was a patch? To me, the old launcher was exemplary as launchers go: It would patch my game, launch my game, and give me access to repair tools if necessary, and otherwise I wouldn’t notice that it was there. You wrote earlier that the old launcher wasn’t directed at any play style – I agree, but it allowed for all.

Quote:
(...) allowing us to clean up a layer of our networking stack (ie: reduce code complexity and maintenance in our own libraries) and move to single logon methodology across all our products. (...)
I can see how that has some clear benefits. Like when the CrimeWatch backend was worked on, I guess.
The difference here, to me, is that where the cleanup in CW wasn’t a positive change before Retribution, it wasn’t noticeable before that either. Here, I saw a reduction in what the launcher could, and a promise of later improvements. I don’t think you have to know a lot about PR to see why that is a bad idea.

Quote:
Regarding the iconic landing page and splash screen, there is work happening on this area by another team (...) [the splash screen] was unmaintained and not updated, leading to, for example, a splash screen for an incorrect expansion showing). As such your argument regarding the splash screen is simply flawed.
For me, when the landing page was removed it was a “huh, why would they ever?” moment. Setting the mood and theme with a great visual and music would, to me, be something that you would work to conserve. It’s not that the landing page in any way is a deal breaker for me; it simply seemed like a dumb decision to remove it. It is one of the small things that, together with major screw-ups and questions like “how do you use x?” make you seem entirely out of touch with the community.
As for the splash screen – as long as it is preserved, this part of my criticism falls flat.

=== Continues below, due to character and quote count caps reached ===
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#804 - 2013-06-25 08:56:44 UTC
=== Continued from above ===

Quote:
Finally, the ability to run multiple accounts simultaneously; I won't say that it's perfect, but it is possible, although certainly clunky. As I stated above, in this post, we're working on improving the experience for those who want to login and play multiple characters, but it's likely to be deployed in two phases, as we consolidate things. Once we can publish our concepts and gather full feedback, I want you to help me test this on Singularity.
I’m not sure “not perfect” and “clunky” are the words I would find appropriate, to be honest.
I tried to log in several accounts on the launcher shortly after the launcher was released, and it took me a day to realise that if this is the way multiple characters will work (in regards to logging in, to access the game) then my alts are not worth the hassle and subscription to maintain.
Of the design flaws, rather than the release flaws, this is actually a deal breaker for me.
I have said this a number of times before, but it needs to be said again and again:
Logging in should be so simple, any idiot can do it. That was how it was before, and how I would have liked it to remain. The problem I see is that the SSO might work for the EVE website “family”, and DUST, and might allow for better Steam integration, but for multiple account users, the SSO principle is actually the heart of the issue.
There are probably ways around this. SSO might work fine with a “master account” or something like that, and I know that master accounts have been discussed within CCP for some years now.

Quote:
(...)I will readily admit that it needs more work, and that that required work will come, you simple have to be patient. You can't both berate us for not listening to feedback and rushing the deployment, and then cry for us to rush out updates at the same time.
I actually won’t berate you for not rushing out the fixes. I will berate you for rushing out a launcher with a number of issues, and then using the patience excuse for not rushing out the fixes.
To me, it does seem like CCP learns just enough about QA after each screw-up to slow down fixes, but not enough for it to last until the next major screw-up.
When I called you a liar before, it was for the combination that CCP has done these screw-ups before and afterwards claimed that “we have learned; your voices were heard; we will improve” – and that for a long time you did avoid engaging with the critics of design issues, while still being active about bugs, and yet promising to make improvements for all.
The first part of that is still an issue, and I’m not seeing the promised results of any learning.

So, those were a lot of words. I am less distrustful now compared to yesterday, and reading your post in detail and thinking over my response has been a kind of catharsis.
Kelshron
4S Corporation
The Initiative.
#805 - 2013-06-25 09:40:28 UTC
Par'Gellen wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
Smoking Blunts wrote:

5. why are you not asking multiboxer's now what they want from a launcher regarding functionality, rather than just doing what ever it is you plan to do? this is a pretty simple thing to do, sent out a survey to everyone with more than 3 accounts registered to anyone email address

We are actually doing this.

I am waiting for my email to this survey you speak of. I would LOVE to detail what I need for running multiple accounts and actually have someone care what I say. I would also LOVE to help with testing the new launchers and be more than an ignored voice on the forums.


Still waiting also....not holding my breath though
Niding
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#806 - 2013-06-25 09:58:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Niding
I appriciate the need for change of the game as things are updated, be it client or ingame mechanics.

I have never complained about changes to mechanics that has affected me and the time I spent ingame, cause
for the most part it makes sense. Plus "mechanics" doesnt change the CORE feeling/hands-on execution
of the game.
Shipchanges and sov mechanics needs to be tweaked as it becomes apparent the "old" one is outdated vs
the realities ingame.
When titans and supercarriers where changed, it affected ships I had spent many months to aquire.
But it was required changes as the profilication of said ships where making them "gamebreaking".

So why do I moan about direct client changes?
Cause it changes the framework of physical movement comfort. In your workplace you have Human Resource Managment (HRM) looking at how to make processes more efficient and "human" friendly.
With the Unified Inventory change it LOOKED much better, but the actual execution of it nullified/ruined PLAYSTYLES
due to the HRM of it. Slow, ackward and "clunky".
It actually required a 6 months break and a CHANGE in my playstyle for me to appriciate the new Unified Inventory.
Now I like the system, but Im not sure if a forced change in playstyle was intended to be required for players to
accept the new system.

Same goes for this new launcher. Its "attacking" the HRM part of the game. Like Unified Inventory it LOOKS nice,
but it makes core processes slower for multiaccounting, and the only "change" in playstyle that will end up
making it acceptable is to log on fewer accounts or less frequently.
The problem with this is that It might make x amount of people ask themselves; "why do I even have this many accounts
when I no longer can be bothered logging them on like I used to?".

You can hope that the strong attachment players have to their accounts/characters will stop most from taking drastic
measures, but on the flipside selling characters will net you xx billions on the Bazaar.
You will have all the isk you need to pay for the toys for your remaining 1 account with 3 characters on etc.

The reason why I keep harping on about this is that I dont get the impression you "get it" with regards to the core HRM
issue.
Its comparable to these detailed things like at the workplace where you change the chair at your workplace.
Your old chair was perfect egronomically for the work you do and the form of your desk, but your boss decides to
swap your chair. It doesnt affect the rules of the work, but changes the core framework.

Im going to extreme detail mapping it out, but I somehow get the sense that many DEVS just doesnt play the game as
much as the costumers to see the longterm effects for core changes. Ofcourse that makes sense, since DEVS should be busy programming this game Blink
You then are dependant on feedback from players on SISI, and if said player advice is ignored (unintentionally or not)
then you WILL get these kinds of reactions.
Par'Gellen
#807 - 2013-06-25 12:23:39 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
I actually won’t berate you for not rushing out the fixes. I will berate you for rushing out a launcher with a number of issues, and then using the patience excuse for not rushing out the fixes.
To me, it does seem like CCP learns just enough about QA after each screw-up to slow down fixes, but not enough for it to last until the next major screw-up.
When I called you a liar before, it was for the combination that CCP has done these screw-ups before and afterwards claimed that “we have learned; your voices were heard; we will improve” – and that for a long time you did avoid engaging with the critics of design issues, while still being active about bugs, and yet promising to make improvements for all.
The first part of that is still an issue, and I’m not seeing the promised results of any learning.
These few sentences sum up the core of my problem with CCP and their QA process in general regarding new features. Well said.

"To err is human", but it shouldn't be the company motto...
Oraac Ensor
#808 - 2013-06-26 00:22:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Oraac Ensor
Oraac Ensor wrote:
Oraac Ensor wrote:
Once again, the patch installation fails because it can't update the launcher, the repair tool says all launcher files are missing and it can't install them afresh.

Yet I have a working launcher!!!

This is just too bizarre for words.

And again . . .
This is getting tedious.

CCP Atropos wrote:
For the record, you can still view the old EVE Launcher landing page here.
What? Not on my screen. There are random bits of the old launcher screen scattered to the four corners of my monitor with a great expanse of black nothingness in the middle and no launching function whatsoever. And what's the point of just being able to look at it, anyway?

P.S. I'm still waiting for the Eve-mail you led me to expect.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#809 - 2013-06-26 01:29:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Salpun
I am getting timed out trying to log in to the server. With a new launcher it kicks over to the old log in screen and a logging in failed message shows up "

Could not connect to the specified address. Odds are that you have not established an internet connection, the server isn't running, or the server address or port number was wrong."

Its not a launcher issue but I am getting status and server unknown return and having to wait for the info to show up so logging in will finish up. then the token times out some times. This just started over the last two days.

Not seeing the server sends this message "Could not connect to the specified address. Odds are that you have not established an internet connection, the server isn't running, or the server address or port number was wrong."

I can get on eventually but it takes some time.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#810 - 2013-06-26 09:06:01 UTC
CCP Atropos wrote:

With the release of Dust 514, and the need for more than one product to be able to log into the EVE Universe, we evolved our login mechanics to rely upon industry standard systems and libraries (OAuth) rather than our own proprietary libraries. Since the EVE Launcher had an embedded browser already, it wasn't a great leap to combine the two to allow OAuth based logons in the EVE Launcher, allowing us to clean up a layer of our networking stack (ie: reduce code complexity and maintenance in our own libraries) and move to single logon methodology across all our products.


I think that you can just concentrate on making the launcher work with EVE, and not be concerned about DUST. By all accounts it is falling on its ass and may not be worth worrying about for much longer.
Par'Gellen
#811 - 2013-06-26 12:46:28 UTC
Rommiee wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:

With the release of Dust 514, and the need for more than one product to be able to log into the EVE Universe, we evolved our login mechanics to rely upon industry standard systems and libraries (OAuth) rather than our own proprietary libraries. Since the EVE Launcher had an embedded browser already, it wasn't a great leap to combine the two to allow OAuth based logons in the EVE Launcher, allowing us to clean up a layer of our networking stack (ie: reduce code complexity and maintenance in our own libraries) and move to single logon methodology across all our products.


I think that you can just concentrate on making the launcher work with EVE, and not be concerned about DUST. By all accounts it is falling on its ass and may not be worth worrying about for much longer.

I agree. This is what they get for making it PS3 only. Serves them right.

CCP, lets focus on PC Internet Spaceships (like Hilmar promised) and forget about this time wasting console garbage. Especially when it affects things that are directly related to said PC Internet Spaceships (like the login process).

*sigh* It's like watching a bad Benny Hill episode...

"To err is human", but it shouldn't be the company motto...
CCP Atropos
C C P
C C P Alliance
#812 - 2013-06-26 13:37:54 UTC
Oraac Ensor wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
For the record, you can still view the old EVE Launcher landing page here.
What? Not on my screen. There are random bits of the old launcher screen scattered to the four corners of my monitor with a great expanse of black nothingness in the middle and no launching function whatsoever. And what's the point of just being able to look at it, anyway?

P.S. I'm still waiting for the Eve-mail you led me to expect.

Well, yea, you're viewing a webpage designed for the smaller EVE Launcher window size in what I imagine is a full screen browser, so of course it's going to be of an odd ratio/perspective.

As for the EVEMail, I don't know the dispatch date; it will go out as part of a general player base survey that we run every year, I believe.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#813 - 2013-06-26 14:32:01 UTC
Par'Gellen wrote:
*sigh* It's like watching a bad Benny Hill episode...


LOL, yeah....but nowhere near as funny. At least that was meant to be a disaster.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#814 - 2013-06-26 22:38:44 UTC
CCP Atropos wrote:
Oraac Ensor wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
For the record, you can still view the old EVE Launcher landing page here.
What? Not on my screen. There are random bits of the old launcher screen scattered to the four corners of my monitor with a great expanse of black nothingness in the middle and no launching function whatsoever. And what's the point of just being able to look at it, anyway?

P.S. I'm still waiting for the Eve-mail you led me to expect.

Well, yea, you're viewing a webpage designed for the smaller EVE Launcher window size in what I imagine is a full screen browser, so of course it's going to be of an odd ratio/perspective.

As for the EVEMail, I don't know the dispatch date; it will go out as part of a general player base survey that we run every year, I believe.


how do you rate this expansion..blar blar.... this survey that is just trash?

how about asking multiboxers directly what they want from a launcher, like you said you were doing in response to my past posts?

are you that bothered that most answers will be to get away from your current POS launcher that you wont actually do this?

OMG when can i get a pic here
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#815 - 2013-07-01 11:08:48 UTC
Any updates?

Or is the “move the thread somewhere that is difficult to find and people will forget about it” thing working for you ?
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#816 - 2013-07-01 21:32:07 UTC
Rommiee wrote:
Any updates?

Or is the “move the thread somewhere that is difficult to find and people will forget about it” thing working for you ?





Sadly, expect this more than any worthwhile updates ......

Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!

POS fix dated back to 2006!
CCP Atropos
C C P
C C P Alliance
#817 - 2013-07-02 10:10:02 UTC
Balder Verdandi wrote:
Rommiee wrote:
Any updates?

Or is the “move the thread somewhere that is difficult to find and people will forget about it” thing working for you ?





Sadly, expect this more than any worthwhile updates ......

I'm watching this thread, so it's not disappeared; I simply don't have anything to update you with.
Par'Gellen
#818 - 2013-07-02 12:30:55 UTC
CCP Atropos wrote:
I'm watching this thread, so it's not disappeared; I simply don't have anything to update you with.
No progress at all? Shocked

"To err is human", but it shouldn't be the company motto...
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#819 - 2013-07-02 13:50:50 UTC
Par'Gellen wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
I'm watching this thread, so it's not disappeared; I simply don't have anything to update you with.
No progress at all? Shocked
Well, it could seem that the changes that led to my new direction was temporary.

Atropos can your latest post be interpreted in any other way than a statement that the work is essentially done?
I find it relevant to know if you at least meant it to be interpreted otherwise.

I was still waiting for the continuation of our civil discourse.
CCP Atropos
C C P
C C P Alliance
#820 - 2013-07-02 14:07:16 UTC
Par'Gellen wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
I'm watching this thread, so it's not disappeared; I simply don't have anything to update you with.
No progress at all? Shocked

Nothing that I want to talk about, no.

Alphea Abbra wrote:
Par'Gellen wrote:
CCP Atropos wrote:
I'm watching this thread, so it's not disappeared; I simply don't have anything to update you with.
No progress at all? Shocked
Well, it could seem that the changes that led to my new direction was temporary.

Atropos can your latest post be interpreted in any other way than a statement that the work is essentially done?
I find it relevant to know if you at least meant it to be interpreted otherwise.

I was still waiting for the continuation of our civil discourse.

There weren't any questions in your last reply, so I didn't feel the need to reply. Did you want to ask something further?