These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Next Unified Inventory Update

First post First post
Author
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#421 - 2012-06-07 23:28:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Krystyn
CCP Goliath wrote:

Which I assume you mean to be that you do not want to use the tree view at all on basic principle? The team are doing everything they can to make this of minimal impact to you, but the tree view itself is not going anywhere so I hope that you can come to terms with it in some way.


Goliath,
We don't want to use the tree view because it takes too long to find what we want in our inventory. I have cans in hangars and they have to be re navigated by the tree every time. So I have to shift-click(which I hate btw) to open another window and then click down at least 4 levels to get to where I want to go to find an item and then I have to do the whole process again to navigate to the destination of the item when before I open the corp hangar double clicked open the can and then drug it to wherever I want.
two shift clicks and at least 8 click selections to do the same thing as a click, double click and drag used to do. Not to mention the lag of the tree navigation. so from 3 movements to 10. Now what if I have to organize a can full of rat loot...were talking thousands of clicks and shift clicks to stash all the high meta stuff i want to keep and pile up stuff for reprocessing. I don't want to do it.

Please fix this for us.

P.S. Why was right clicking open things so bad? It was fast simple and easy and opened to the exact place I wanted.
Tree not so much... Please bring back right clicks.
Challu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#422 - 2012-06-07 23:34:49 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
There's a reason why MANY softwares have moved the hell away from tree views and implemented tabs.

It's called basic, simple sense.

Writings are horizontal (western ones). That is, they take lots of horizontal real estate.

Tree views make already large windows unnecessarily larger by putting horizontal information to the left of the window.
Tabs make large windows functional because they take small vertical real estate and zero horizontal real estate.

The very fact you are going against all the accepted modern UI designs and find it good enough to "not going anywhere" is worrysome.

You are implementing outdated and unpractical concepts. The day the UI is bug fee, it will still be conceptually wrong.

See, many times I wanted to send CCP my curriculum but with decision makers taking this kind of directions and then sticking to them, I would feel embarassed. I would probably be bound to some "you won't publicly state your superiors borked grand time" legal agreement as well so I'd be put together the same people who can think these kinds of designs.

No way.


Listen to this man.

You should have implemented this UI in lieu of the Asset tab allowing Eve-wide searches, and left the old system as is..

Least you can do is bring back the exact functionality as before, including right-click options, neocon buttons etc.

CCP, I realize you like the tree, but it gets in the way the moment you have more than a few things to work with.
Jame Jarl Retief
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#423 - 2012-06-07 23:51:59 UTC
Challu wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
There's a reason why MANY softwares have moved the hell away from tree views and implemented tabs.

It's called basic, simple sense.

Writings are horizontal (western ones). That is, they take lots of horizontal real estate.

Tree views make already large windows unnecessarily larger by putting horizontal information to the left of the window.
Tabs make large windows functional because they take small vertical real estate and zero horizontal real estate.

The very fact you are going against all the accepted modern UI designs and find it good enough to "not going anywhere" is worrysome.

You are implementing outdated and unpractical concepts. The day the UI is bug fee, it will still be conceptually wrong.

See, many times I wanted to send CCP my curriculum but with decision makers taking this kind of directions and then sticking to them, I would feel embarassed. I would probably be bound to some "you won't publicly state your superiors borked grand time" legal agreement as well so I'd be put together the same people who can think these kinds of designs.

No way.


Listen to this man.

You should have implemented this UI in lieu of the Asset tab allowing Eve-wide searches, and left the old system as is..

Least you can do is bring back the exact functionality as before, including right-click options, neocon buttons etc.

CCP, I realize you like the tree, but it gets in the way the moment you have more than a few things to work with.


Yeeah, see, it's too bad CCP doesn't actually give a hoot about player feedback until players start to leave in droves.

I mean, look at Incarna and population collapse. We got Crucible out of it, more communication, more transparency. Now a year passed, and we're back to not knowing what's coming until it's almost here and it's too late to change anything because too much time was already invested in it.

Sad state of affairs, really. Worst thing is, I don't think anyone even wanted the new UI. The only feature people got excited about was being able to see the estimated value. Which, in my experience so far is still not worth it because the estimate is usually wrong by 40-200%. And this could have been done with the old UI without massively screwing things up with the new one and setting the other development back by who knows how long while they fix this one.

Par'Gellen
#424 - 2012-06-07 23:52:55 UTC
Acks wrote:
"We did this thing because one of us thought it was a good idea. We got attached to the idea and ran with it and we are not looking back damn the consequences. You can yell and scream and kick all you want and while we will tweak a few things for you to make it suck slightly less, we are not going to actually listen to you or give you what you want. Here is some lube, grab your ankles and learn to like it because this is going to happen and there is nothing you can do to stop it."

This is a very good analogy and sums up CCP's attitude in my opinion.

"To err is human", but it shouldn't be the company motto...

Challu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#425 - 2012-06-08 00:20:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Challu
Krystyn wrote:

P.S. Why was right clicking open things so bad? It was fast simple and easy and opened to the exact place I wanted.
Tree not so much... Please bring back right clicks.


The right-click option, as well as the neocon icons for ship hanger and station goodies were removed presumably to force the "Unified" in the Unified Inventory.

It cannot possibly take much coding to recreate those shortcuts/bindings to those nodes in the tree of the UI - it will really, really help in increasing the usability of this inventory system. This will mean you will have to take a step back from the enforced "unification" of stuff and activities, as counter-intuitive as that may be.

A very simple example on what's 'wrong' with the current system:

Scenario: I want to drag loot from my ship hanger to my station stash.

Old system: Double click ship, select item, drag to station hanger icon in neocon - done.

New system: Double click ship, select item, click on arrows on top left to open tree view, scroll down to station hanger (I have multiple ships so hanger's off screen), drag item from hold to hanger - done. (You could do the opposite by starting with the UI, but its about the same number of steps.)

Now, a simple action like dragging a widget from hold to hanger takes 2x steps and 4x as much time. Others have provided more elaborate descriptions. Please understand that this isn't about polishing the edges or fixing fat tail bugs - it's really about the basic, fundamental issue of usability.

It's your fault really - you spoilt us with a nicely working system before, and now we're holding you to that standard ;)
Davina Sienar
The Misinterpretation of Silence
#426 - 2012-06-08 00:22:53 UTC

[/quote]
Shift double click solves all the things.
shift double click does not work on target ship icons yet though.[/quote]


oh lol now we move from shift click to shift double click ?? hoho great improvement
pls invent the tripple click mebbe ?
^^


plsplspls for any sake--- just the basic setting option, that even the win-file manager has:
OPEN EVERYTHING IN NEW WINDOW

what is so diffrent ?? there is a wreck or container in space, I select from overview or direct (1 click), then click that loveley button that there is on top of overview with that open box sign, and poof magic a new window with the wreck or conti opens
(2nd click)

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT ????? why all that shift dbl etc click stuff ??


fix the freaking basics !


CTRL + ALT + DEL solves all the things
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#427 - 2012-06-08 00:27:13 UTC
Personally, I think with 2 shifts and a triple-click, fireworks should shoot out of your exhaust.

YK
Maul555
Xen Investments
#428 - 2012-06-08 00:39:32 UTC
Challu wrote:
It's your fault really - you spoilt us with a nicely working system before, and now we're holding you to that standard ;)



aaaaaaaaand.... THIS!
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#429 - 2012-06-08 01:55:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Chokichi Ozuwara
Maul555 wrote:
I would really like to get a DEV response on this exact scenario. Please explain to me what I am doing wrong, and how the new UI can help me do things better than before.

They can't, because they don't use the new UI, and there is no better example than how it worked in WH POSes. If anyone at CCP had tried using the new UI at a WH POS, they would have immediately seen the issues prior to shipping. It would have been impossible to miss. I can only guess that their testing and Q&A process doesn't include common (let alone uncommon) use cases, and as mentioned 10 million times, they ignored a lot of the feedback from testers (which has probably turned off a lot of people to testing).

I've resigned myself to the fact that Crucible was pretty good, and they shipped Inferno as a substandard release relative to Crucible. Even the youtube video is substandard. It feels like they tried to tidy up neglected aspects of the game, patch the economy and update their codebase. It doesn't feel to me that this expansion did much to push the game forward or reward people who play frequently. No new ships, the new modules are meh, no one is crazy about the new war system, no one is crazy about the missile effects (which are just eye candy and reduce tactical visuals), the only people who like the Incursions nerf are people who didnt do Incursions, the FW guys aren't exactly thrilled about the changes there either.

I don't know what the next update is supposed to be, but it better be bigger and more rewarding than reorganizing the ship lines and forcing us to train race specific destroyer and battlecruiser skills.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#430 - 2012-06-08 02:05:49 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Par'Gellen wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Well, I would argue that it does, it's just that the tabs are now to the left of the window rather than at the top of the window. Would I be fair in saying that? Yes, it's not exactly the same, but surely we can compromise here in that the functionality has been retained.

You can say whatever you want. Nothing changes the fact that it's harder now. It's more clicks now. It's not intuitive. For God's sake it even requires keyboard input now to do things that before were a single left click of the mouse. If I only open one inventory window a day I could live with that. Multiply it a thousand fold and bask in the glow of the worst UI in the universe.


We're now getting into opinion, but as I say, I will ask the team if rebinding the shift click to be normal click as a shortcut option (note - not default behaviour) is possible.

That's all for me this evening folks. Fly safe.

I need to say something important.

Show info Allready works this way, with shift click opening a new window and normal click opening the new info over the old one. You even have back and forward buttons, and a check box to make shift click toggle opposite behavior.

So if show info can do it shouldn't the items window ?

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Kblackjack54
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#431 - 2012-06-08 02:22:52 UTC
If CCP is geniuine about talking sensibly to the players then maybe they would like to step up and explain to them why it was so imperative that this UI update was brought in at all, what was the motivation for it and why after so much negative feed back on it from SISI and now on TQ they want to persist with it at all.

This because I for one am baffled by the latest offering regarding the time taken in beating the current UI into some semblance of a workable product.

That you are going to take a step back from the multiple fixes and workaround scenerio is of no suprise, that it took so long is.

An even bigger suprise is that you still cling to the notion that this product can ever be made to work in the sense of returning the original intuative fuctionality to the UI at all.

Your rather weak explanation that in some way you have only moved the tab system from the top of the window to the side is an enhancement I for one found insulting, however if your full and frank disclosure regarding this forced change to game mechanics answers this it will go a long way to helping the players understand what this change is actually for.
Maul555
Xen Investments
#432 - 2012-06-08 02:43:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Maul555
Might I be displaying too much hubris in explaining that CCP has lost sight of its mandate? The UI is for the people to decide how to use it... Not for CCP to decide how the people use it.
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
#433 - 2012-06-08 02:52:40 UTC
Quote:
I was referring to wrecks and cargo containers in my earlier post. I am not aware of the intended functionality of this as fits POSes, but will check out the old behaviour on a reference server tomorrow along with current behaviour as you describe.


Why the hell would the functionality be different between wrecks/cargo containers and ANYTHING ELSE? What kind of drug use is going on in CCP, and where the hell can I get some? It HAS to be some good stuff.

Quote:

Which I assume you mean to be that you do not want to use the tree view at all on basic principle? The team are doing everything they can to make this of minimal impact to you, but the tree view itself is not going anywhere so I hope that you can come to terms with it in some way.


Does this mean I can look forward to having full 100% feature parity with the old inventory UI and NEVER have to open a window that has that awful craptastic tree on it? As in, every inventory window I open doesn't even have it minimized, but unattached? Let the people who want the tree menu open it up with the "inventory" window, while the rest of us use neocom shortcuts/right click menus to open up unburdened windows. Pretty simple really. "Inventory" should have been a completely seperate function, like an assets screen that you can do stuff with. That would have worked much better than gutting the UI. I don't foresee me coming to "terms" with the undue burden any time soon, since I'm pretty sure 99% of the performance issues are related to the way the game handles the tree. Then again, maybe I'm wrong, and it isn't the source of untold suffering and agony to the games performance, but I'd still rather never see it again. Ever. It can go **** itself.

Quote:

And in general....good Lord, people, how much crap do you own!?!? More tree entries than you have screen height? I gotta see this, please post a screen shot.


Uh. Go to a PoS? Have a bunch of containers? Plenty of ways to achieve that without actually gaming it to TRY and achieve it. More tree entries than screen height isn't even a lot of stuff, especially since MOST people have wide screens these days, meaning vertical real-estate is at a premium compared to horizontal. But meh, what do I know. According to CCP, I'm too stupid to use the UI before saying it sucks anyways. If I'm THAT stupid, I couldn't possibly understand the simplest implications of a wide screen. Really, the current design is just embarrassing.
Maul555
Xen Investments
#434 - 2012-06-08 03:03:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Maul555
Actually I am still working with a standard CRT display for about 80% of my eve activity, just because of the way my desk is set up according to my needs, and my PC capabilities and my budget. I have very limited screen space in a 1280 x 1024 screen space that I dual client on. The space problem I have has not been lost on me. I have adapted and am only complaining about the really big issues. I am not one to complain about little bullshit.

Seriously... If I ever plan on advancing from my current point as a corp director, to a more important position in eve politics, this UI will play a direct role in my decision process when i decide if it is worth the trouble to do it at all...
Kasriel
#435 - 2012-06-08 03:06:17 UTC
here's a question for somebody at CCP that isn't to do with how horribly broken and useless the UI is

who actually designed it? not the code the layout? because frankly it's shocking, you have an estimated price system that's really pretty innacurate and eats up a massive amount of space, why not have it on the same row as the item count to save "dead" window space? why not make that feature optional? like you push a button and it gives you it's estimate?

same with the filters/m3/icons they hog a load of screen space as well - and that's without touching the space the tree view needs to be at all effective

ignoring all the problems with this - and trust me there are so so many - i can't say it was even designed well at a graphical level let alone a usability one.

and on the whole usability level, it may well be easier for new players - who don't have much crap - but for older players who have a fair collection of ships and assets it's a nightmare, instead of opening just what i need open and drag and drop now you've gone ahead and added either more clicking to the equation or a crapload of scrolling. how was this not taken into account?
Swanger
Infinitus Odium
#436 - 2012-06-08 03:23:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Swanger
Dear CCP,

The UI tree sucks. Change it back!

20 plus pages of it sucks and your still trying to defend it! Change it back!
Maul555
Xen Investments
#437 - 2012-06-08 03:28:34 UTC
Eve is all about choices... and I just wanted to make sure that CCP knows that the choices they are making right now have repercussions throughout the eve universe....
disasteur
disasterous industries
#438 - 2012-06-08 04:33:32 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
Please keep it civil and refrain from personal attacks. Spitfire
Biff Rodgers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#439 - 2012-06-08 04:47:06 UTC
Guys, I'm getting a head ache over this.
More people are bellyaching this than supporting it.
Now it's been a few weeks since unified inventory has been out, learnt some new tricks.
At the end of the day, to do the same work I did before on the previous system, I'm now having to do more mouse clicks and keyboard presses to do the same thing.

I'm not against change if the change is an improvement.
But this is not an improvement.
I'm having difficulty understanding why CCP is pushing this, it's like CCP is raking water up hill with this.

Now, to the point, I ask CCP, why is this unified inventory being pushed?
We as a whole don't like it.
Please bring/roll back to the previous system for inventory.
Down the track some one will come up with another idea, try it out and if it's better, implement it.
Not steam roll it out over your customers.

Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#440 - 2012-06-08 04:51:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Swanger wrote:
Dear CCP,

The UI tree sucks. Change it back!

20 plus pages of it sucks and your still trying to defend it! Change it back!


There's another 70 page thread dude. The whole argument is ridiculous frankly.