These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Carnyx release - General feedback

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Natya Mebelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1341 - 2015-06-08 00:40:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Natya Mebelle
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
1) First of all "I hate it" is perfectly acceptable feedback, since apparently they didn't listen to the feedback from the test server and just rolled it out anyway.

2) Secondly, where do you get off telling anyone what their reactions to this UI change should or should not be? How do you possibly have the gall to say **** like that?

3) I am here precisely to communicate "properly" with the developers. My communication consists of the following:
"This is a bad change."
"This change was also implemented badly."
"This did not need to be changed in the first place. If you think it did, explain your reasoning."
"Change for it's own sake is bad, so if that's why you did this, revert it as fast as is possible."


Let me repeat what you said before. Your question was:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
What was wrong with the old system, anyway?
You have been pretty active in this topic. That means, the question has been answered a multitude of times, even in just this topic alone. Other answers can be found throughout the other topics regarding icons, including the devblog.

1) No, "I hate it" is not feedback, but a reaction only portraying an opinion. Feedback is, when you're giving a reason what made your opinion form like that.
It would be much more useful to say: "I hate it because I am colourblind and can't make out NPCs from Player ships" or something like "I hate it because now with the detailed icons the UI scaling hits alot worse" or maybe even "I hate it because you re-used icons for something completely different that we already associated since years".

2) I'm not telling anyone what their REACTIONS should be. Like I mentioned just above, you're around long enough in this topic to know better, and I'm sure you can connect information when you're reading it.

3) Your communication is based on assertions that are only half correct. The change was implemented badly, yes, but it has been said that the old icons would need to change sooner or later, and they explained their reasons. This makes it not being a "change for change sake." even if they had not explained their reasons, the obvious things for the change are obvious. That doesn't make the way (non beta opt-in) and the style of the icons any better though.

Maybe you understand now why I said "ignorant and oblivious". This was not a wilful assault on your persona, but simply my opinion of your previous message. If you take this too personal, I advise you to take a step back and reconsider.

Now, letting this slide and bringing something more constructive to the topic again:

Dear CCP, since one of your reasons to redesign the icons to be compatible for larger screens to remain future-proof, then why have you not worked on your scaling algorithm first? And if you were so concerned about legibility, why did you not make sure your system supports loading of individual iconsets for each scale? One of the biggest benefits of manually crafted sets is the ability to separate between global UI scale and Overview scale. This could potentially lead you to have the UI at 90% but use the 110% sized overview icons.

So, to be blunt, what was your reason to only go 90% of the way instead of the full 100% ? Creating 3 additional sets once one has been designed and completed is hardly any effort. And making sure your basic software architecture works properly before considering such a big step should have been your primary concern before even touching the icons.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1342 - 2015-06-08 00:41:04 UTC
still not liking these icons... Yes, i can get used to them but.... they are still like those pictures my 9yo daughter draws....

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Louanne Barros
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1343 - 2015-06-08 01:15:21 UTC
Remember when you could tell a Thrasher from a Capsule out of the corner of your eye, after a few drinks?

Good times. "EVE: Some of the Second Decade"
Colonel Tosh
The MorningStar. Syndicate
#1344 - 2015-06-08 01:41:13 UTC
I am highly disappointed in the new icons for a plethora of reasons.

The main reasons for me are:

1. The quality of these icons is very low compared to what I expected from CCP.
2. They are nowhere near the quality they put forward in the dev blog a while back.
3. The icons are too small and do not transfer well to the grid.
4. There is too much complication that isn't worked out well, and without a transitional period for people who aren't always on SiSi. It results in confusion in battles and loss of ships because of it, which I think is a pretty bad side effect.

But the biggest problem I have with these icons is that people have been complaining about the way they were in their test stage, and yet CCP had to ram it down the throat of people. I am sorry, but I really don't enjoy a majority of the new icons.


That said, positive icons are Wormholes and Corpses.
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1345 - 2015-06-08 03:49:42 UTC
The good:

The icon overhaul. It could be better, certainly a few icons are awful, but overall, the idea of ship size relating to specific shapes appeals. Glad you guys took a page out of Homeworld's book there.

Release of the jackdaw. More content is always good.

The bad:

New caracals look awful. I'm going to let my sub lapse for 10-15 days to demonstrate my lack of appreciation for these "new" models. They don't look caldari. You have all the old models of caldari design to work with, and you make the ships look like a Transformers movie. Its got no style, no distinction, from the mass of stuff that's already out there. I'd be happier if you guys just ripped off some old privateer ship designs compared to the over the top polygon loading.

Some of the icons look silly. I especially want the old stargate icon back. A nice circle vs a square with rounded corners? I feel people respond more to the elegance of the simple circle-with-triangle icon.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Myriad Blaze
Common Sense Ltd
Nulli Secunda
#1346 - 2015-06-08 05:00:31 UTC
Natya Mebelle wrote:
And if you were so concerned about legibility, why did you not make sure your system supports loading of individual iconsets for each scale? One of the biggest benefits of manually crafted sets is the ability to separate between global UI scale and Overview scale. This could potentially lead you to have the UI at 90% but use the 110% sized overview icons.

So, to be blunt, what was your reason to only go 90% of the way instead of the full 100% ? Creating 3 additional sets once one has been designed and completed is hardly any effort. And making sure your basic software architecture works properly before considering such a big step should have been your primary concern before even touching the icons.

This!

Handcrafted icons for different size scales are probably always better than icons that are scaled using a software algorism - at least with regard to looks.
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1347 - 2015-06-08 05:12:26 UTC
I'm actually heading to sleep as Iceland gets ready for their working day, but two thoughts if the icons -have- to stay because the heads of the corporation said so: Thicken the borders so they aren't so eye-straining. Differentiate more by color. Is that a player or an NPC? Colors could help. But I'd also support an icon rollback and rework.

(No, I don't need a pony, but the restoration of the Quafe/Pleasure Station would be nice... or a pony icon!)
TrickyBlackSteel
Black Consuls
#1348 - 2015-06-08 05:25:59 UTC
The icons are so bad, can you make a buyyon where i can choose the old ifons , please!
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1349 - 2015-06-08 05:28:24 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
I'm actually heading to sleep as Iceland gets ready for their working day, but two thoughts if the icons -have- to stay because the heads of the corporation said so: Thicken the borders so they aren't so eye-straining. Differentiate more by color. Is that a player or an NPC? Colors could help. But I'd also support an icon rollback and rework.

(No, I don't need a pony, but the restoration of the Quafe/Pleasure Station would be nice... or a pony icon!)


I guess you weren't here for monocle-gate. The "heads" have to do what's best for the customer base they've tailored the game to.

If a bunch of people stop subbing over finally getting fed up with changes, they have to change their changes or accept the loss of customers.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Squatdog
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1350 - 2015-06-08 05:45:41 UTC
After using the new icons for the last couple of days, I'd like to reiterate that they are absolutely terrible; indistinct, samey and counter-intuitive.

The only new icons I actually like are the corpse and acceleration gate icons.
Squatdog
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1351 - 2015-06-08 06:28:19 UTC
Just lost a Hookbill because new Destroyer icon looks identical to old acceleration gate icon.

Yay.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#1352 - 2015-06-08 08:08:37 UTC
Rats inside ghost sites are still red crosses.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
darkchild's corpse
Rens Nursing Home
#1353 - 2015-06-08 08:45:16 UTC  |  Edited by: darkchild's corpse
Natya Mebelle wrote:

[...] scaling and concepting stuff, not enough room to quote everything [...]

1) So by doing what you suggest, squishing them vertically, your icon design choice becomes more limited, and you have to come up with clearly distinguishable new shapes. You might manage that, and I'm sure I'm sure they will work in 100% scaling, but we need to deliver 90% properly. Else your Freighters and Rorquals will close their brackets on the side. And then you’ll still have the same problem of making those icons separate enough from OTHER types of icons.

2) Not only do you make a contradicting statement, but it is also just your opinion and playstyle. You're letting this influence your design choices, so your experience with the game matters little in this case. It will bias the issues you want to see fixed, while ignoring others. See, you NEED to distinguish combat ships from non-combat ships and those have to be distinguishable from everything else too. You want to know what you DON'T need to shoot, and you want to see non-combat ships properly if you are aiming for them specifically. Overview filters don't matter in this case. There are many people doing pvp who have all ship types on their overview, because why let a non-combat ship get away, right? c: So you NEED the distinction to be clear.

3) That is not true. The smaller your space becomes, the less choices for shapes and variations you have and the harder people with smaller screens or less than ideal eyesight or both will be negatively affected. In fact, most of the time it is the relative amount of UNUSED space which makes the grade or not. Because this unused space allows for better visibility of what the rest of the icon is, and the unused space also allows for more spacing from one icon to the next.


of corse i can't scale them exactly like the ui render engine does because i don't know the algorythm. and even if i would know it, i expect myself to be too lazy to look for a tool wich uses this algorythm. or even write one myself. in general it doesn't matter what we will use as icon. in eve it will look ****** when scaled. but scaling the old icon worked relatively well (as you said yourself in the post that i was first answereing). so we know that the shapes i used will work more or less well even scaled. but, as i already said, i'm not doing CCP's work here, neither am i in an appreticeship for UI desingers here. all i am doing is saying that i don't like the new icons, explaining why and also visually providing something that i personally would like. this is the best way feedback works in my opinion. and therefore of corse i let my personal experience and playstyle influence my design choices. what else should i base them on if i am giving feedback and not doing CCP's work?

the part of the game where the icons make the most sense and are most important is in pvp, when you have to know what is there. so, as i already said, i don't feel like the other icons had to be changed in general. in my personal opinion they were fine before carnyx.

for the other points:
i didn't say that we don't need any icons for industrial ships or something. but we don't need that many. in my opinion, 3 are enough. one for haulers, one for frighters and one for mining ships in general. i don't need different icons for a venture or a hulk. icons are for realizing whats there and making decisions within a split second. for industrials in general thats not as important as for pvp ships. within that split second you see that this is a mining ship. to see what it is exactly, you have the type column in the overview and enough time to read it. and scaling the old industrial icons wasn't a problem either.

i also personally don't think that the color tag is disturbing the readability of the icons i did. it didn't with the old ones and, again, thatswhy i am trying to simply improve the old ones instead of creating completely new and different confusion. the old ones worked well in any way for me and were only lacking the difference between some ship types wich i tried to improve. maybe the lack of an icon for biomass was a problem too.

and by the way. i don't think that you understood what i was saying about scaled UI and more viewable things. i was just explaining why i personally play with a scaled UI. this had nothing todo with the icon discussion. if the scrolling part of my overview is 1000 pixels in height and each entry needs 20 pixels of room, i can have 50 entries in my overview. if the needed size for each entry shrinks by scaling hte UI, i can see more entries at the same time. this is just an example, don't tell me how many pixels each entry needs on wich scale for real.

and again to make this clear: please don't tell me how to be a UI designer. i'm a programmer and in this particular case, i'm a gamer who gives valid feedback about a feature he doesn't like... nothing more, nothing less. use the time and energy to tell CCP how to be a UI designer or whatever...


also: i don't care for typos... \o/

Kinda suits the SP trading discussion (lyrics in description)
Panterata
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1354 - 2015-06-08 08:55:05 UTC
So CCP Surge and CCP Claymore,

Your silence is more then 3 days

We think that you have enough feedbacks (68 pages)
Pls reply when you will get the old icons back
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1355 - 2015-06-08 10:10:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
I have just noticed the Blood Raider skin for the Paladin in the NES (at least the preview of it). Are you kidding me? The skin is just mirrored from one side to the other instead of a proper skin with a unique pattern spread over the ship. You see, this cheap implementation is exactly why I refuse to throw more money at CCP.

And why do station services still have health indicators? They are not damagable anymore, their hitpoint indicator should be replaced with the entosis link timer or indicators which side has more entosis time/influence on them.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Natya Mebelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1356 - 2015-06-08 11:10:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Natya Mebelle
13kr1d1 wrote:
They don't look caldari. You have all the old models of caldari design to work with, and you make the ships look like a Transformers movie. Its got no style, no distinction, from the mass of stuff that's already out there.
I have to agree with you, in all sadness :c I mean, I liked when CCP started to change Caldari designs to be less lopsided. I remember the Ferox being lopsided before Trinity arrived... or was it Quantum Rise... I don't know, long ago :D
I appreciated the first changes they did. Scorpion change was wonderful, and when they touched the Moa, it definitely got more appeal as well. People could debate about the Condor, and I'm still not sure why they removed the aft bridge of the Cormorant.
But when they redesigned the Blackbird, it was the first time when I said "no, this is going too far." The blackbird went from an ugly blocky asymmetrical duckling to an ugly fragile symmetrical duckling.

I don't understand why they're trying to push an entirely different design philosophy onto Caldari. Why are we getting more and more fragile designs for a faction that was known to have rough, blocky cuts? I'm also not sold on all the stupid moving parts while in warp. Who cares, really? I admit the Caracal looks better in the game than on the concept, and I appreciate the lines looking more menacing, but it just looks too fragile in general.
But the Jackdaw? What a disappointment. Why even give it the name of a bird, when it looks like a broken electric toothbrush? Or a separate radio antenna? Really...


darkchild's corpse wrote:
but, as i already said, i'm not doing CCP's work here, neither am i in an appreticeship for UI desingers here. all i am doing is saying that i don't like the new icons, explaining why and also visually providing something that i personally would like.
To me, you were giving the impression of "My icons will work better, so we should be using them" and that is why I picked this up in order to explain not only to you, but to everyone else reading why things are not as easy as people believe it to be. It is easy to throw in an idea or two that is just a small slice of the whole, which is totally fine, but again... you gave me the impression you expect this to be accepted and to work in all scenarios. And that is simply not true c:

darkchild's corpse wrote:
and by the way. i don't think that you understood what i was saying about scaled UI and more viewable things. i was just explaining why i personally play with a scaled UI. this had nothing todo with the icon discussion. if the scrolling part of my overview is 1000 pixels in height and each entry needs 20 pixels of room, i can have 50 entries in my overview.
I did understand it well, and I'm seeing that you're not getting the bigger picture. First, only because you cramp in 50 entries does not mean you can distinguish all these entries easily. A great example is simply changing the row spacing in any document. There is a reason why many people can read better when the individual lines have more spacing between each other, and why 1.5 linespace is pretty much standard in most media.

Icon legibility does not rely on using all the space available either. We can see this with current celestial icons. Planets, Stargates and stations are all bigger than before. This makes them less easy to distinguish from one another... the overview became less practical to use because it started to feel crowded. The relative space lost between the icons made it harder for the eye to latch on to individual differences. The stargate looking more like a square with round edges instead of a circle, and the triangle on the side not standing out as much any more is not helping either.

I further read the dismissive nature of you post, and will accept that you don't care any more, so I won't continue to bother either. Thank you for providing a good example of why things aren't that easy c:


Panterata wrote:
So CCP Surge and CCP Claymore,
Your silence is more then 3 days
It was in the morning hours when you wrote your posts, and I saw most devposts rolling in during the afternoon, and we just had a weekend between that. Give them a chance, really.


Edit:
I wonder why I haven't seen a single CSM posting in this topic. I thought they were the link between developers and community? Oh well.
uhnboy ghost
Corporation 98237776
#1357 - 2015-06-08 11:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: uhnboy ghost
uhnboy ghost wrote:
uhnboy ghost wrote:
uhnboy ghost wrote:
uhnboy ghost wrote:
24h since last login...
hey look a new patch, hmm no info on when u can switch back to the old icons so i can play again...

i check back in tomorrow again, i guess i check whats on sale on steam while I wait.


46h since last login...
hey look a new patch, hmm no info on when u can switch back to the old icons so i can play again...

i check back in tomorrow again, hmm maybe do a big cleaning of my appartment while i wait.


70h since last login...
hey look a new patch, hmm no info on when u can switch back to the old icons so i can play again...

i check back in tomorrow again, i guess i... well its friday so time to drown my sorrow and fall asleep crying while watching old eve movies and remembering the good old days when i could play eve.


94h since last login...
hey look no patch today, hmm no info on when u can switch back to the old icons so i can play again...

i check back in tomorrow again, i guess i... well its National Day here today so i guess i celebrate it


165h since last login...
hey look no patch today, hmm no info on when u can switch back to the old icons so i can play again...

i check back later this week, starting to not care anymore

Edit: "u only complain on the forum but i bet u 100m that u stil play" (talking afk whit a friend) http://i.imgur.com/XjuHHf5.png well u loose, send the isk pls... never mind keep it, i dont need it :-)

//uhnboy 84K probe scans in 2014 http://i.imgur.com/Uaid5iu.png
darkchild's corpse
Rens Nursing Home
#1358 - 2015-06-08 11:37:28 UTC  |  Edited by: darkchild's corpse
sorry if i was a bit rough and sorry for giving the wrong impression... but you were giving me the impression that you either expect me to come up with a perfect solution for everyone or just want to proof that you have more clue about all the designing stuff than me... wich is why i sounded like that in my last post.

and yes, i did enough web development to know that padding is very important for readability. but it makes a difference if i'm able to see the whole enemy fleet or just a part of it. specially if i'm FC or target caller. for me personally it is the most important thing to have a quick overview over the whole situation without scrolling. thatswhy my overview and local chat also goes over the complete hight of my screen in addition to the scaling ;)

Kinda suits the SP trading discussion (lyrics in description)
Tao Dolcino
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1359 - 2015-06-08 12:09:44 UTC
Indeed, CSM, where are you ? Funny, each time there is a true crisis between the players and CCP, the CSM disappears Shocked
Won't you help us have the option to choose between the old and the new icons, just like the map ? Is it too much asking ?
Ponder Yonder
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#1360 - 2015-06-08 12:16:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Ponder Yonder
Dear CCP,

I followed your suggestion of 'getting used to it'. Except that I'm not used to it at all.

I work with thousands of icons from dozens of applications every day. Your new set is by far the most difficult to use:
- Counter intuitive
- Attempting to convey redundant information
- Attempting to convey fine nuances with single pixels
- Indistinct / Undifferentiated
- Not suitable to instant threat assessment

Others in this thread has made much better cases and given very detailed, constructive feedback.

I sincerely hope you act on it, because this change is NOT a quality of life improvement. Quite the opposite. Eve is now less enjoyable.

BTW, the 'New Map' is on the same slippery slope, where you have not taken all use cases into account and have now announced that something is 'Out of Beta' when it is in fact completely useless to anyone ever attempting to use scan probes.

- Ponder