These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE General Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

CCP is thinking about removing the IGB

First post First post
Nose' Feliciano
#81 - 2014-07-09 12:53:41 UTC
JediMind Tricks
1st. Pariah Malefactor corp.
#82 - 2014-07-09 12:56:37 UTC  |  Edited by: JediMind Tricks
De'Veldrin wrote:
JediMind Tricks wrote:
soooo many 1 monitor scrubs worrying about having to alt-tab to order a XXL pizza
Stop being peasants and go buy another oneRoll

So what you're saying is that everyone who has more than one monitor is a Fatty McFatterson who uses the second monitor solely to speed up their ability to inhale large amounts of calories at an ever increasing rate? Like little human black holes of foodstuffs? Is that what you're implying? HUH?!?!

lets be fair siggy/dotlan/all that other stuff comes second to be being able to order fast food without having to turn your eyes away from eve for 2 seconds.
If they took away the IGB im sure there would be more cases like that Chinese kid that forgot to eat for three days while playing WoW

All this talk of fast food really makes me want a pizza now.... Thanks for wrecking shotting my diet Evil
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#83 - 2014-07-09 12:57:39 UTC
Two step wrote:
CCP should not remove the IGB, they should be devoting more effort to it, including more integration with the client. I should be able to drag items into the IGB.

If they want to remove it, I could imagine some of the functionality being replicated in CREST, for example things like location/ship type tracking. Until that is available, CCP should not even consider removing it.

+1. Removing the IGB is a terrible, dumb idea.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#84 - 2014-07-09 13:01:02 UTC
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Austin K'Pfor wrote:



Fukung has at times been the only thing keeping me awake on those long patrols in deep space (ie sitting on a titan waiting for our cyno bait ship to find a pod or rookie ship for us to hotdrop with 70 HACs).
Icarus Able
#85 - 2014-07-09 13:01:56 UTC
Hatshepsut IV wrote:
Sparrow Creature wrote:
Right, because everyone living in WHs would just up and cancel their subscriptions. No one at all would even try to adapt. I completely agree with your assessment of what would come to pass.

I'm pretty sure you don't actually scan that much if you think removing our mapping tools is just a matter of 'adapting'. If someone takes away your eyesight you don't continue to drive by 'adapting'.

Mine along with many other corps dont use mapping tools. Its called having a good bookmark system and doing this thing called communicating.
Im not saying the mapping tools arent good and make things easier but saying its impossible to work without them is incredibly idiotic.

That said.

Keep the IGB. It seriously shouldnt take that much dev time to keep up to date.
Prince Kobol
#86 - 2014-07-09 13:02:47 UTC
Jack Tronic wrote:
At around 59 minutes,

According to the latest CSM townhall. CCP is thinking about REMOVING the IGB.
Apparently "issues" about the work maintaining the IGB. Also an CSM member says there is little interest in keeping it.

Ignoring the fact that the IGB helps in times of mining or shooting the worlds most boring NPCs. (Don't lie, C5/C6 sleeper sites are on autopilot at this point). The IGB is the only way our wormhole mapping tools remain valid.

Let this be a call to arms. Don't let CCP remove the IGB. Otherwise you'll also be forced to run two monitors to use an browser while playing EVE. You'll be forced to manually map wormholes/

Don't let this be an end of an era because CCP is delusional about the quality of their own content.

Yes, users of Tripwire, vippy, evewholes, and whatever the heck else is out there, this affects all of you.

You must all be vocal about how much you love the IGB.

Edit: EVE's new "SSO" is NOT a replacement. It is simply an authenication service and has no capability in providing the data that the IGB provides. Nor will it make your life convenient browsing the interwebs while autopiloting sleeper sites.

For me this is the biggest reason to get rid of the IGB.

Grog Aftermath
#87 - 2014-07-09 13:05:16 UTC
Never use it.

But then again I'm not interested in SSO either.
Aebe Amraen
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#88 - 2014-07-09 13:28:28 UTC
CCP FoxFour wrote:

This is the first mention I have ever heard of CREST interacting with the client, rather than just with the server. Forgive me for misunderstanding something that CCP devs have never talked (publically) about before. The website <-> CREST <-> Server <-> Client route seems a bit unnecessarily circuitous, but if it provides the same functionality as the IGB javascript I can live with it.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#89 - 2014-07-09 13:46:00 UTC
TEST Intel map uses features of the IGB. While it will work OOG, it works better through the IGB. Please do not remove it.

Yang Aurilen
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#90 - 2014-07-09 13:55:30 UTC
Nose' Feliciano wrote:
what is IGB?

Incestual Goon Bromance

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!

Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#91 - 2014-07-09 13:59:03 UTC
Removing the IGB is very bad idea.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie

JediMind Tricks
1st. Pariah Malefactor corp.
#92 - 2014-07-09 14:03:48 UTC
Yang Aurilen wrote:
Nose' Feliciano wrote:
what is IGB?

Incestual Goon Bromance

Idiotic goon brotherhood

man, i may make that my next corp name Lol
Elvis Fett
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2014-07-09 14:08:17 UTC
Removing the IGB makes about as much sense as removing the Jukebox, none what so ever. So taking that into consideration, say goodbye to your IGB.

IGB = In Game Browser
Dave Stark
#94 - 2014-07-09 14:09:56 UTC
i probably missed it but; if they remove the IGB what will happen when you click a link in a chat channel?
Or are we just not going to have the functionality to open a link from a chat channel if the igb goes poof?

the only use my igb has is reminding me that it sucks and i need to paste that youtube link in to a non-****** browser to watch the video some one has sent me the link for.
Jake Rivers
New Planetary Order
#95 - 2014-07-09 14:11:41 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Get rid of the IGB...for an in game browser that can actually load video.

Nash MacAllister
Anomalous Existence
The Initiative.
#96 - 2014-07-09 14:50:36 UTC
As a WH corp, we use multiple tools on a continuous basis that all rely on the IGB. If you remove it and the functionality it provides, our life becomes much more difficult and without a doubt, activity levels will suffer.

Either update it, retaining compatibility with the existing IGB, or leave it alone. But do not remove it.

Yes, if you have to ask yourself the question, just assume we are watching you...

Tyrannos Sunset
#97 - 2014-07-09 14:56:58 UTC
I play in true fullscreen. That isn't changing, so, don't do anything hasty. The IGB is outdated, but unless you give us more tools in the game's UI, it's necessary.

"Do not lift the veil. Do not show the door. Do not split the dream."

Karak Terrel
Foundation for CODE and THE NEW ORDER
#98 - 2014-07-09 14:57:06 UTC
No matter how crappy and old the IGB is, it's still better than IE
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#99 - 2014-07-09 15:14:15 UTC  |  Edited by: MHayes
I think Dev time is better used on other things.

Just run in a window and get 2 screens if browsing while playing is that important.

I do think that having more out of game tools in game would be nice but that is the beauty of the PC. We can do other stuff on them at the same time as playing a game. Dev time can be better used to do other stuff.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#100 - 2014-07-09 15:20:13 UTC
Aquila Sagitta wrote:
Remove IGB and replace with updated IGB pls pls pls

Gib html 5 and websockets plox!

This pretty much sums it up.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff