These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#681 - 2012-06-13 14:47:17 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:


You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.


I have done so for years. Theres a lot of inconsistent behaviour there. But of course you would know that because you obviously watched my video.


Hadn't done when I posted, have now. See above for feedback.


I got an idea! (So much for multi-posting).

Since we got this new Neocom, could you please modify the inventory button as follows:

1) You add a new menu in the Open EvE menu

2) The new menu contains icons to open current ship inventory, ships hangar, corp hangar, items hangar.

Pronto, everyone are happy!

New players will just hit the 1 inventory button they get when they install the game.

We old players find those icons and drag them on our Neocom hot bar and are happy.

Please doooo eeeet!



This is similar to something that the team is discussing as an option. Again, there are a lot of implications beyond how simple the idea may seem at face value, but they're talking about it.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

DazedOne
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#682 - 2012-06-13 15:03:08 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Callidus Dux wrote:
CCP has to think about it, why it was necessary to bring out two new forum rules.
Sure the hate and upcoming increased personal attack on CCP employees is not tolerable. But at least obvious. It is not so, that the majority of the eve community is upset because CCP did a good job or listened to the customer. It is because they force unwanted and unfinished things that where far away from ANY usability or improvement and completely ignore ALL customers who pays to play the game and do not want to test it; or being unable to play the game any longer because of this absolute terrible UI. It is a fact that barely one loves this UI. Have a look at all the different threads in the forum. (If you are able to find all of them.)

As it is now: CCP denies every statement what they will do in the FUTURE. They only let us know little things about the next week. What comes next month? What will you bring MORE to improve the UI? Just “Improvements” and “Listened feedback” is not enough to calm down the player base who don’t like the unified inventory.
I had a small “conversion” with two CCP’s in another thread. And not surprisingly; all I got was nothing constructive from them. I can not write or link the comments from them because they are deleted and a reconstruction from my memory would not give a proper picture.

So I would really suggest to bring a information website where all interested people can have a look at the planned changes for this UI. I, and perhaps many others, do not need a tight fit high-tech masterplan with all details and the correct time frame.
Just a list with all ideas which will come back to this UI. And an explanation why something will not come back. Denial of a right click menu or an icon at the NeoCom would be not a good idea. It would be easy to implement and would help players. Why deny this changes? That makes no sense.

The DEV’s and CCP’s are under enormous pressure. But its not the fault of the paying customer. Its CCP’s and its release dogma fault. So please stop forcing and do not ban people because they feel ignored from you and want a statement from you. Say something more than just empty phrases like “Improvements” and so on. WHAT exact do you plan? Why do you not rebuild (I want not a roll back) the old UI and degrade this unified UI to the asset window as many others asked?

I do not like your filters. WHY? I have containers which I can not access with this current UI.
I do not like the est. price calculation. It is always wrong, not useable and causes lag and calculation time.
I do not like to have elements into one window that doesn’t belong together.
I do not like to have more shortcuts or SHIFT+X solutions to have my windows back!
I just want double clicks and right click options and icons in the NeoCom. (without any shift)

Think about it and please react. Someone in the forum stated “Please stop beginning your DevBlogs with ‘Hello Spacefriends’. At this point we are no friends anymore.”
This alone should show the mood of many players at present.
Continue to act as you do since 22.05.2012 and EVE will possibly not reach the 10th anniversary.

CCP is your company; EVE is your child; but without enough customers you can not pay your bills and employ your people or develop the game. I am at the point where EVE has no fun for me anymore. Sadly- but it is the hard fact.

Callidus Dux
(no gameplay since 22.05.2012)


At absolutely no point should any hard working developer have to suffer a personal attack for doing the oh-so-terrible-thing of communicating with their customers or changing a feature in a game. Your behaviour in the Inferno 1.1 Sisi Feedback thread was atrocious which is why your posts were deleted. You didn't bring anything but ranting and namecalling to the table, and this is why you didn't get anything constructive.

Your comment about majority is way off. This thread has 113 unique users posting in it. It's called a vocal minority and is very common on forums, and it makes it seem like far more people are angry if you get a 33 page threadnaught going, but the average posts per user in this thread is 4, and 10% of the total posts in it have been made by one user. Approximately 45% of the total posts have been made by the top 10 posters in the thread, of who I am one. Someone trolling our devblog opening is not an indication of "the mood of many players at present". I don't debate that there is a number of people who are disaffected at the moment, but your estimation of their percentage of the player base is grandly overstated.

EDIT: "(no gameplay since 22.05.2012)" All this does is tell me that you haven't tried out any of the fixes and are just soapboxing.



Just because people are not on the forums complaining doesn't mean people like this pile of crap. My whole alliance hates this UI. Just because they aren't on here flaming you doesn't mean they like it, therefore your percentages are off also CCP.
Dennie Fleetfoot
DUST University
#683 - 2012-06-13 15:06:44 UTC
When I worked in customer services for a large national supermarket chain, we had a simple rule.

For every one customer that took the time to make a complaint there's ten times the number who couldn't be be bothered and just won't use your services again.

So the 113 figure you've mentioned would be taken as 1130 with a complaint and if they tell just 2 friends each that's 3390 who's only knowledge of your company is that you're not very good.

This same company would look at that figure as a conservative estimate of the number of complaints and with over 3300 possible complaints about something it would be made an absolute priority to be dealt with. And that's millions of customers a week, not the few hundred thousand CCP has.

They would also never, ever dismiss people complaining about the same thing as a vocal minority. They would ask where is it that we're doing wrong and how can we correct it.

This philosophy is shared by all the company's whose attention to customer service is known to be legendary. Most of us could list them off by heart.

Now if your going talk about only a vocal minority complaining about UI when most seem to be happy with it or adapting to it, I would point out that the massive number of bug fixes already pushed out to UI since Inferno blows that argument out of the water. This group of people, this 'vocal minority' have found and highlighted so many bugs in UI, you should be thanking them for showing how lacking your QA protocols are.

I would also be prepared to bet that this minority are also the majority of those players, like me, that took the time and effort to beta test this on Sisi for you. People who are passionate about the game to the point where we do your job unpaid. And we found out all these problems for you nearly 8 weeks ago. We listed, made videos, gave suggestions as to improvements and we were totally ignored.

And now, we're being dismissed as a 'vocal minority'.

Have you any idea how insulting that is?

We spent our free time trying to help you fix your coding and now because we've shown up major problems with the design direction CCP is going with in the UI we are now being vilified.

Now Goliath, you say you can't speak as to Sisi feedback. I urge you to go and read that original feedback thread and you will see that every bug fix you've had to do since inferno with UI could've been avoided if you'd acted on it. How much of yours, Soundwaves and others time could've saved?

I would also, once again, like to press CCP as to real situation type demonstrations being presented via video as to how the new UI is better, faster and uses less keyboard and mouse work than the old one.

I am perfectly willing to admit that I'm too stupid to use this new UI and may need video instruction as to it's proper use.

I am also willing to assert that no such undertaking will be taken by CCP because they know now that UI is pretty much useless as a day to day gaming interface.

This 'vocal minority' proved that on Sisi and it's proved it on the new TQ test server.

CEO Dust University

CPM 1&2 Member

www.twitter.com/DennieFleetfoot

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#684 - 2012-06-13 15:20:00 UTC
Dennie Fleetfoot wrote:
...

They would also never, ever dismiss people complaining about the same thing as a vocal minority. They would ask where is it that we're doing wrong and how can we correct it.

...This group of people, this 'vocal minority' have found and highlighted so many bugs in UI, you should be thanking them for showing how lacking your QA protocols are.

...

Now Goliath, you say you can't speak as to Sisi feedback. I urge you to go and read that original feedback thread and you will see that every bug fix you've had to do since inferno with UI could've been avoided if you'd acted on it. How much of yours, Soundwaves and others time could've saved?

...


You seem to be rather insulted by the term vocal minority, which was not my intention. I don't see what's insulting about the term but I apologise to you if you feel marginalised by it. To me, a vocal minority is just that - a group of people less than the majority that are particularly vocal in their feelings.

The entire point of these devblogs and feedback threads has to been to find out what's wrong so we can make it better.

As to the comments about bugs and my department, you are not well informed on our development processes, so I encourage you to read my upcoming devblog on the topic. I would remind you that while players do indeed submit bug reports and discuss issues on the forum, we also test extensively in-house. Just because bugs get found doesn't necessarily mean there is time to fix them. Please do not make assumptions or talk down about my hardworking, talented department.

Remember the difference between bugs and feature requests. Container doesn't open when clicked - bug. Container doesn't open in a separate window when clicked - feature request.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

vasuul
BLUE M00N Fetish Group
#685 - 2012-06-13 15:28:28 UTC
I still say if you put this to a vote ,you will find more people are saying roll it back

that was a good video post of the botch up
But one detail it did not go into, was corp hangars and members hangars .

and if you use the tree and just drag and drop on the tree you have to be fast , or else goodbye to the window you are dragging from

also if i have a can in the corp hangar tab and i want to look in it if i click on the can with a right click and say open
IT KICKS ME BACK TO MY CARGO HOLD ON MY SHIP rather than opening the can
if i go to the stupid tree yeah i can open it and even open it in a new window

Also keep in mind i am getting old ,and as i get older my eyesight ,is not as good as it used to be
with chat this is no problem cause you can increase font size a bit

With this tree i find my self squinting to read what i am looking for

the old corp tabs were big enough you could read em

Like i say for young people this might not be a problem but for us older farts that love eve too its a BIG problem

Is there anything that can be done about this ????? if we have to keep the tree lets at least make the font size adjustable

Thank you



Gainard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#686 - 2012-06-13 15:29:25 UTC
Constructive part continued...

Make the Price forecast more precise - it is way off most of the times, rendering it useless. (That it is close sometimes is beside the point - since I can't trust the information I still have to check each time). Update the prices once on log in and store it locally on the client for the duration of the session - maybe add an update function on double click on the price.
The price should be adjustable as the regions' selling (average on lowest 10) or buying (average of the highest 10) price. Buy / sell should be switchable (right click on price) with sell as default.
If a new item enters any container make the price "UNKNOWN" and only once "UNKNOWN" is double clicked query its price and add it to the local list.

Remove the tooltip price info. Takes too much time, make that info part of the rightclick menu - meaning do NOT enter an item "Show Price", but add "Sells at x ISK" and "Costs about x ISK", x being the average as explained above. Querying two prices should not take that much time... However, it it takes more than one second (i.e 1.0000001s on the most remote island conceivable - Falkland perhaps Blink) make this optional as well or skip it all together - there is already "View market details".

When I jettison a can it should appear in the tree view. If I first have to open it by other means the treeview is obsolete. Make an entry "jettisoned containers", sort by time elapsed since jettison, making the newest container the first from the top. Make an option to sort by name. Additionally, if there is already is a window of a jettisoned container open then open it as a new - now active - tab in that window for the person who jettisoned the container. This should apply for corp / fleet members in this area as well, only without changing focus to the new container for them (add a new tab but do not change the focus from their current tab - actually only the hauler needs this, but it would be hard to tell who is the hauler via code...). Once a container is emptied it should be deleted from the tabbed list. (For jetcan or fleet/corp mining with or without support vessel like orca etc.). Yet do not open a new window for any member that has no jetcan open. Just make it available in his/her treeview (having looting in mind).
Those tabs should have a right click menu: Target, Align to and Close (open/activate on left click of course...).
"This area" is referreing to the current belt, deadspace etc. (soory, forget the correct term. I do not mean solar system or, worse yet, region...)

Make the treeview available on the Assets window. There it actually makes sense since this is a viewing thing and does not require moving things around like in items hangar, ships, containers, POS, etc.


If all this is to much then at least change the UI to open a new window every time by default and opening in the same window when shift clicking.


Reverting back to whine mode:
Removing the link to this thread from the start window will further reduce the number of people to post here as sometimes it is quite difficult to find the right thread in this forum...

As to merge Item + Ship hangar - I tried it before the UI came and did not like it, so I swtched back. If you (CCP, not Goliath personally) made the UI optional like you did with CQ (after some discussion) this thread would not exist.
Talking of the CQ: the reason the UI raises so much (obviously little in your eyes) sentiment is the same reason why CQ caused so much trouble: it affected the way we handle things in a negative way. In the CQ case causing way too much time to do anything.

And finally: I never spend as much time on the forums as I did after UI was introduced. I actually spend now more time on the forums then in game Evil

Man, I train for certain goals and then the related skills / modules / ships get nerfed. I hate to be addicted to EVE.

Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
Joint Venture Conglomerate
#687 - 2012-06-13 15:31:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jackie Fisher
CCP Goliath wrote:
That isn't how I gauge reaction, I just wanted to prove a point that metrics > hyperbole.
Pleased to hear it!

So do you have meaningful metrics on player satisfaction of the new inventory?

I won't ask if you have enough player hyperbole on this subject. Lol

CCP Goliath wrote:
I also didn't say they were a small group, I said they were a minority - big difference.
OK, fair enough, although you did such a nice job of making the numbers look trivially small that I'm tempted to send you my tax returns to fill in for me.

Fear God and Thread Nought

Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#688 - 2012-06-13 15:31:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Kusum Fawn
I am angry about the lack of useability in the new UI, I am also part of the vocal minority in eve that posts on the forums.

This does not mean that the mute majority is happy with the UI. (nor does it mean that they are displeased) It simply means they have not stated in a place where you can read, where they stand on this issue. one way or the other.

The population that you do have, that posts on the forums is generally unhappy.

Mostly because every fix you've had to enact since the UI went live, was talked about in the Sisi threads before it went live. and there still hasnt been a review of the ultimate goal that this UI was supposed to accomplish.


How is it better ?
What is now easier?
What exactly is customizable?

all these question are still unanswered, while problems with inventory not appearing, loading screens, blocky inventory screens that are laid out to maximize the covered screen space. salvaging window issues. window position memory.

a good number of people stopped complaining, not because you fixed their issues, but because they were getting no where. after a month or more, this is understandable.

Dev's giving workarounds for basic issues, instead of actually addressing those issues. is pretty confusing. The loss of useability from the old UI to the new is also. this has never been addressed. WHY?


Oh quick edit;

basic matching of useability with old Inventory system is a feature request?

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#689 - 2012-06-13 15:54:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Very simple solution. Post a poll on front page of EVE:

DO YOU PREFER THE NEW UI TO THE OLD UI
[ ] YES [x] NO

End of story and speculation.

And of course don't doctor the numbers.

Or someone could just do the poll spamming the link to a third party website in Jita. That way we wouldn't have to question if CCP doctored the numbers.
vasuul
BLUE M00N Fetish Group
#690 - 2012-06-13 15:55:48 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
Very simple solution. Post a poll on front page of EVE:

DO YOU PREFER THE NEW UI TO THE OLD UI
[ ] YES [x] NO

End of story and speculation.

And of course don't doctor the numbers.

Or someone could just do the poll spamming the link to a third party website in Jita.



AMEN TO THIS ^^
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#691 - 2012-06-13 15:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
CCP Goliath wrote:
Gainard wrote:
It may well be only 113 unique users. In this thread. I know of at least three more threads I have posted in with 50+ pages. There are probably a couple threads more. There may also be some complaints delivered via the bug reporting system. However, most players never post at all. It's the same with a bad restaurant, most people do not complain, they simply do not come back.

Of those who do post the vast majority is deeply dissatisfied with the UI and CCP's handling of it.

You can not deny there is no thread with 100+ unique users that express their happiness about the UI.

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny that opening a second window involves the keyboard - that was not required before.
You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before.
You can not deny the lag to display the windows' content when entering a station, which was not a problem before.
You can not deny that the UI is buggy - OK, that counts for all new content, but that does not mean it has to be that way.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.
You can not deny there was no warning from the SiSi users.

You can deny to revert back to the old system - if you can make the UI work for us then these threads go dead. You may even get a thank you here and there.

You may keep the UI without addressing our suggestions and problems. But people will quit - certainly not a majority, otherwise you would have more posts here. But its a revenue cut that is easily avoidable.

In business its always easier to keep your customer happy so they come back for more (in this case stay on) than to accquire new customers.


First, the restaurant analogy. The actual analogy is “A happy customer tells one friend, and an unhappy customer tells everybody.” This is why you rarely get vocal minorities shouting about how something is good. The first devblog on the Unified Inventory had 25 pages of happy feedback, then 25 pages of unhappy feedback. Almost all of the happy people were unique posters and did not repost later.

I don't deny your first point but would amend it to "in some cases" as it is not the case for all, or even most use cases.

I don't deny that you need to shift-click, but would say that firstly, sometimes things change, and secondly, I have been pretty clear that I have talked with the team about making this switchable with old functionality via a shortcut if possible and they are looking into that.

I don't understand "You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before." - do you mean login to the client if you previously had it open?

We have acknowledged that there is some lag in cases of large inventories generally featuring containers. This is being worked on as we have stated.

As for the design direction and the Sisi feedback - that is not my place to comment on.



It's pretty shocking that these people have the audacity to argue that this junk UI is a good thing. They either still don't see it (ouch) or are simply dishonest.
Gainard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#692 - 2012-06-13 16:03:30 UTC
Off topic, but deemed - by me - to be neccesary:

I wish to express my gratitude to Goliath for listening in and replying to all the complaints even though he is not responsible for the problems and subject to some abuse he does not deserve.

I might explain some of the abuse by the sheer lack of respone we have received so far concerning our complaints. But lets not forget we are talking with a real person with real feelings, who is in defense of a problem he did not create.

So please everybody, try to stay fair. You, as I, may not be satisfied with all of the replies - but we should honor the fact that there is someone to at least listen to us. That is much better than in a lot of other threads where there is no reply at all.

So please give Goliath a break and try to reason without abuse. As for me: mea culpa, do as I say, not as I do Blink

Man, I train for certain goals and then the related skills / modules / ships get nerfed. I hate to be addicted to EVE.

Dennie Fleetfoot
DUST University
#693 - 2012-06-13 16:07:34 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Dennie Fleetfoot wrote:
...

They would also never, ever dismiss people complaining about the same thing as a vocal minority. They would ask where is it that we're doing wrong and how can we correct it.

...This group of people, this 'vocal minority' have found and highlighted so many bugs in UI, you should be thanking them for showing how lacking your QA protocols are.

...

Now Goliath, you say you can't speak as to Sisi feedback. I urge you to go and read that original feedback thread and you will see that every bug fix you've had to do since inferno with UI could've been avoided if you'd acted on it. How much of yours, Soundwaves and others time could've saved?

...


You seem to be rather insulted by the term vocal minority, which was not my intention. I don't see what's insulting about the term but I apologise to you if you feel marginalised by it. To me, a vocal minority is just that - a group of people less than the majority that are particularly vocal in their feelings.

The entire point of these devblogs and feedback threads has to been to find out what's wrong so we can make it better.

As to the comments about bugs and my department, you are not well informed on our development processes, so I encourage you to read my upcoming devblog on the topic. I would remind you that while players do indeed submit bug reports and discuss issues on the forum, we also test extensively in-house. Just because bugs get found doesn't necessarily mean there is time to fix them. Please do not make assumptions or talk down about my hardworking, talented department.

Remember the difference between bugs and feature requests. Container doesn't open when clicked - bug. Container doesn't open in a separate window when clicked - feature request.


Apology accepted. 'vocal minority' has perhaps a different meaning to yourself but it's increasing being used by corporations and politicians as being a 'PC' way of dismissing different views as being stupid in the same way that using the term 'silent majority' gives justification to some truly outrageous views. I'll stop now before I start turning this into a political studies dissertation.

And if I unintentionally dis'ed the work of your team I apologise for that.

I have confidence that between us all we will get this thing working as it should.

It's just so frustrating that after we told you the problems this UI has on Sisi and many of us went so far to say as to pull it from inferno, that it showed up anyway.

I look forward to your dev blog explaining how these choices come to pass.

Could you also push your colleagues as to the idea of a tutorial video for UI. It's an idea that seems to be gaining traction here.

CEO Dust University

CPM 1&2 Member

www.twitter.com/DennieFleetfoot

Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#694 - 2012-06-13 16:09:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Gainard wrote:
Off topic, but deemed - by me - to be neccesary:

I wish to express my gratitude to Goliath for listening in and replying to all the complaints even though he is not responsible for the problems and subject to some abuse he does not deserve.

I might explain some of the abuse by the sheer lack of respone we have received so far concerning our complaints. But lets not forget we are talking with a real person with real feelings, who is in defense of a problem he did not create.

So please everybody, try to stay fair. You, as I, may not be satisfied with all of the replies - but we should honor the fact that there is someone to at least listen to us. That is much better than in a lot of other threads where there is no reply at all.

So please give Goliath a break and try to reason without abuse. As for me: mea culpa, do as I say, not as I do Blink



Since when is QA lead not responsible for ... QA? I'm sorry i'm just really confused here. QA lead also doesn't get to prioritize fixes? That's unheard of. QA lead pretty much calls the shots on QA. Unless the command structure in CCP is completely messed up, and QA lead doesn't have the authority to do the job. In that case nothing will fix this and it's a lost cause.

Look i meant nothing personal at any point. I don't care who these people are individually, but I think the person in the QA lead position is definitely one of the people most responsible for this fiasco. It's the final gateway that gives the final approval for code to go live.

It should also be the person to call the shots on code rollback. Maybe it's time to step up a bit.

Let's just face a simple fact here:

Code was allowed to go live by QA that had over 50 factual BUGS in it, as documented by patch notes.

QA is not responsible for this?

It goes without sayign that whoever wrote the code in first place obviously did not do due diligence testing it before it went to QA.

As far as action items go, when something like this happens, the most likely option on the table is for QA lead should to go ahead and roll back the code.
Dennie Fleetfoot
DUST University
#695 - 2012-06-13 16:13:41 UTC
Gainard wrote:
Off topic, but deemed - by me - to be neccesary:

I wish to express my gratitude to Goliath for listening in and replying to all the complaints even though he is not responsible for the problems and subject to some abuse he does not deserve.

I might explain some of the abuse by the sheer lack of respone we have received so far concerning our complaints. But lets not forget we are talking with a real person with real feelings, who is in defense of a problem he did not create.

So please everybody, try to stay fair. You, as I, may not be satisfied with all of the replies - but we should honor the fact that there is someone to at least listen to us. That is much better than in a lot of other threads where there is no reply at all.

So please give Goliath a break and try to reason without abuse. As for me: mea culpa, do as I say, not as I do Blink


Your time is appreciated Goliath.

We only get angry because you guys make a great game and on the ocassions that something happens to break it, well this happens.

CEO Dust University

CPM 1&2 Member

www.twitter.com/DennieFleetfoot

Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#696 - 2012-06-13 16:15:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Kusum Fawn
CCP Goliath wrote:
The first devblog on the Unified Inventory had 25 pages of happy feedback, then 25 pages of unhappy feedback. Almost all of the happy people were unique posters and did not repost later.


I just want to note here, that it took for the first dev blog on UI , 5 days to reach 25 pages. and some of the happy people posted before the UI was available on Sisi for actual testing.

second edit->
and the first very unhappy post was on page 7. with many "feature" requests before starting on page 1 (post 13)

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Gainard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#697 - 2012-06-13 16:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Gainard
QA failed to see the problem - point taken.
QA did not create the UI. QA probably did not check SiSi forum because they only check the code, but not the forum replies. They might only check for errors in the code, not for usability. We call that operational blindness (betriebsblind in german) - its quite wide spread: it is outside of your focus, therefore you don't notice the problems so obvious to others.

Man, I train for certain goals and then the related skills / modules / ships get nerfed. I hate to be addicted to EVE.

Dennie Fleetfoot
DUST University
#698 - 2012-06-13 16:24:02 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
The first devblog on the Unified Inventory had 25 pages of happy feedback, then 25 pages of unhappy feedback. Almost all of the happy people were unique posters and did not repost later.


I just want to note here, that it took for the first dev blog on UI , 5 days to reach 25 pages. and some of the happy people posted before the UI was available on Sisi for actual testing.


That is a good point actually. A lot of were pleased about UI (I was) before we actually tried it.

CEO Dust University

CPM 1&2 Member

www.twitter.com/DennieFleetfoot

Tlat Ij
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#699 - 2012-06-13 16:51:47 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
I don't understand "You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before." - do you mean login to the client if you previously had it open?

Not only is that how it worked before, (I think this changed with the new neocom and not in inferno or escalation) if you switched ships while the cargo hold was open, your cargo window would switch to the new as long as you had it open last time you exited that specific ship.
CCP Goliath wrote:
I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.

That would be a completely valid suggestion if you could still change focus between windows without need to right or left click in the window and change the display. You used to be able to change focus with middle click but for some reason this was removed.
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#700 - 2012-06-13 16:53:46 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
*snip*

Remember the difference between bugs and feature requests. Container doesn't open when clicked - bug. Container doesn't open in a separate window when clicked - feature request.

Totally with you on the delta between defects and feature requests, that is if we, as end-users, had a clear definition of how the Inventory system was designed, documented, coded and tested to work.

We, as end-users, do not. Nor should we be expected to know what was intentionally designed into the client when we have no comprehensive guidance or specifications on how the Inventory UI should work.

As a result, there will be CCP-perceived "feature requests" that fall under the categories of:

a) "Functionality that used to be available in the client that end-users expect to see in the current version."

b) "What a end-user perceives should be the correct client behavior per their historical experience with EVE and with other computer based UIs."

c) "What appears to be unexpected behavior and is simply being reported."

d) "What a person wants the client to do." (probably the closest thing to a true feature request)

It is up to CCP QA, design and development human resources to determine how to categorize end-user feedback, respond to the end-user and then route the defect entry or feature request to the proper internal personnel.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.