These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Shpongled Victim
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1441 - 2015-06-09 21:32:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Shpongled Victim
Natya Mebelle wrote:
Shpongled Victim wrote:
Love the new icons, dont have a problem while exploring, mission running and salvaging. Im not scaling, playing high sec mostly and do no pvp yet. 22" monitor and HD resolution.
So whatever causes eyestraining and headache and all this rant remains a miracle to me .
Please try to play the game at 90% scaling and tell me if you still don't get any eyestrain and headaches either c:

Are you playing PvE in highsec? If so, then you can take all the time you want in locking and switching targets, you know what is coming at you, and you know you're not in danger at all. Depending on the ship you're flying, it doesn't even matter what you target because you treat all targets the same. This take away a lot of eyestrain and headaches because you simply don't need to bother. I'm curious if that is the case with your example.

Quote:
What i dont like is the new asteroid/rocks design and why ships that were implementet much later become new skins before ships that were allready in ages ago (e.g. my loki)

This is a technical limitation. Tech3 Cruisers are basically a modular polygon puzzle, which makes it difficult to paint it properly when taking all possible variations into account. Else it simply does not look good enough.

Actually, you provide a wonderful example! Only because the icons work for a limited, risk free environment at 100% scaling, does not mean they are perfectly fine everywhere else :D
I'm not hating or am envious, I just want to know how you would do at 90% and if my speculation about your gaming situation was right.



Yea right about my gaming style but i dont treat evrey target the same. Im a medium arty specialist and allways need to lock on the frigs/dessis first then going for the cruisers and BS´s after this. Thats what i mean i have no problems, actually for me its a big improvment. But my distance to the screen is only about 40-50 cm lol.nd scaling down to 90% blures even my shipconsole UI, looks ****** but as i turned off anti aliasing everything looked sharp again. Mebe thers a issue with the icons?
Eraza
Fuzzyness Enterprizes
#1442 - 2015-06-09 21:47:44 UTC
Morihei Akachi wrote:
Eraza wrote:
I'm quite sure many of the suggestions would love for their work to be used, and would happily sign over the legal rights to those icon mockups for just the honor of having their suggestion put into the actual game.

If this is the problem, then how about that CCP? you do some simple gesture to make all the lawyers happy, and the rest of us get to play with good icons.. :)

Or do I misunderstand the legal issues here?
If I had made any of those suggestions then I would happily sign over the legal right to CCP for a limited ed ship skin
or probably even just the honor of it.
I'd love to be able to brag that a UI suggestion of mine got implemented into an actual game :P

I’m sure it’s not that simple. Otherwise it would not have taken so long to get the alliance logo problem sorted out.


Another thought, it's very stupid if the legal matter does work that way,
because i'm pretty sure everyone drawing mock designs(many of the good ones JUST expanding on the original icons),
is trying to help here, not making sure they draw the potential icons before CCP officially does, in some absurd legal scheme..
CCP Surge
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1443 - 2015-06-09 22:04:30 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Surge
I just finished reading through the latest rounds of feedback, and we've discussed the situation internally in depth now. So here's where we're at now, and the options we're considering with the icons:


  1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.

  2. 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We we know its an underlying rendering issue that's been around much longer and not caused by the icons themselves, but one that's been suddenly and very clearly illuminated by their release. We want to keep 90% scaling as a option, but at the same time acknowledge that it will never look as good or be as cleanly supported as the other modes. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.

  3. We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set (crosses vs brackets, vs Xs) and that many new icons are too detailed to identify quickly. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.

    4. While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.

  4. We're meeting with the CSM later this week to discuss much of this feedback, and I'm sure many of your concerns will be represented as well. Either way the significance of this and your well reasoned responses in this thread aren't lost on us. I'll keep poking in here to keep you guys updated on any further actions coming with regards to the icons.
Steijn
Quay Industries
#1444 - 2015-06-09 22:08:45 UTC
CCP Surge wrote:
I just finished reading through the latest rounds of feedback, and we've discussed the situation internally in depth now. So here's where we're at now, and the options we're considering with the icons:


  1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.

  2. 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We we know its an underlying rendering issue that's been around much longer and not caused by the icons themselves, but once that's been suddenly and very clearly illuminated by their release. We want to keep 90% scaling as a option, but at the same time acknowledge that it will never look as good or be as cleanly supported as the other modes. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.

  3. We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set (crosses vs brackets, vs Xs) and that many new icons are too detailed to identify quickly. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.

    4. While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.

  4. We're meeting with the CSM later this week to discuss much of this feedback, and I'm sure many of your concerns will be represented as well. Either way the significance of this and your well reasoned responses in this thread aren't lost on us. I'll keep poking in here to keep you guys updated on any further actions coming with regards to the icons.



if it goes on much longer without reverting back to the old icons until you at least sort a solution out, im afraid some of us will no longer be here.
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1445 - 2015-06-09 22:16:36 UTC
Im happy to hear that this issue is under discussion but i feel a quick rollback is probably for the best for the short term.

Also im not really liking the 90% issue, it seems like a really important and popular feature. Is it just not possible to render icons at 90% and then upscale? Can you all look into ensuring any final designs look at least acceptable at 90%?
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
#1446 - 2015-06-09 22:18:03 UTC
CCP Surge wrote:


  1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.


Have you tried big crosses?

I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg

CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
Shpongled Victim
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1447 - 2015-06-09 22:24:56 UTC
Desert Ice78 wrote:
CCP Surge wrote:


  1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.


Have you tried big crosses?


Everything, but please no fckn bold red crosses again! Oh my god, people have to look more sci fi movies to get away with fat red crosses....even the military uses icons that offers more information than a big or small red cross....
Thyson Krupp
Immortal Legion
#1448 - 2015-06-09 22:25:55 UTC
CCP Surge wrote:



While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.





Does the option for simpler group brackets mean we can have back one icon for each ship class? (frig, dessie, cruiser.....)
I
Red Deck
The Tebo Corp
#1449 - 2015-06-09 22:30:52 UTC
CCP Surge wrote:
  • 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We we know its an underlying rendering issue that's been around much longer and not caused by the icons themselves, but one that's been suddenly and very clearly illuminated by their release. We want to keep 90% scaling as a option, but at the same time acknowledge that it will never look as good or be as cleanly supported as the other modes. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.
    • It's not just 90%. I suspect it's anything that's not 100%. I'm using the UI at 125% and the overview icons are just plain ugly now.
    Don Matteo
    Fortuna Executive
    #1450 - 2015-06-09 22:46:18 UTC
    <----Head in hands in despair...........

    Just rolled back till u have a solution............
    Vic Jefferson
    Stimulus
    Rote Kapelle
    #1451 - 2015-06-09 22:49:38 UTC
    The old system was amazing. Sometimes you really need to lose something to see how good it really was.

    I was having an extreme amount of trouble differentiating drones from frigates yesterday:
    http://i.imgur.com/k9md0GX.png

    People want change, and we all are excited to want to see EvE look and play its best, but not at the expense of functionality.

    Iteration on these types of features does NOT belong on the live server. It simply does not. People, myself included, will be less than happy to see repeated iteration on the live server interfere with normal game play until such a time as the new system is perfected. Option to use the old icons is literally the cure all solution in the mean time.

    Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
    Eke Patang
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1452 - 2015-06-09 22:55:45 UTC
    CCP Surge wrote:
    I just finished reading through the latest rounds of feedback, and we've discussed the situation internally in depth now. So here's where we're at now, and the options we're considering with the icons:


    1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.

    2. 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We we know its an underlying rendering issue that's been around much longer and not caused by the icons themselves, but one that's been suddenly and very clearly illuminated by their release. We want to keep 90% scaling as a option, but at the same time acknowledge that it will never look as good or be as cleanly supported as the other modes. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.

    3. We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set (crosses vs brackets, vs Xs) and that many new icons are too detailed to identify quickly. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.

      4. While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.

    4. We're meeting with the CSM later this week to discuss much of this feedback, and I'm sure many of your concerns will be represented as well. Either way the significance of this and your well reasoned responses in this thread aren't lost on us. I'll keep poking in here to keep you guys updated on any further actions coming with regards to the icons.


    The last paragraph of option 3 would be better if it simply read "we are looking into adding an option that would be the same as the map choice and allow people to choose new icons or old"
    Natya Mebelle
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #1453 - 2015-06-09 22:56:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Natya Mebelle
    CCP Surge wrote:

    1. Right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.

    2. 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.

    3. We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.
      4. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.

    4. We're meeting with the CSM later this week to discuss much of this feedback. I'll keep poking in here to keep you guys updated on any further actions coming with regards to the icons.
    1) Just give us back the NPC crosses temporarily as soon as patchingly possible, THEN you can tinker with a different set. There is nothing in the current graphic set that uses crosses for anything else. Honestly... you can just leave the crosses be once you re-implement them and give them more distinction by changing bar length and cutaways individually, as I mentioned before, at the bottom "untapped potential of old icons".


    2) While that is nice, you should have remembered your limitations first. We urge you to rework how the overview itself is functioning. We either need the option to have individual icon sets for individual scalings OR we need vector based icons OR we need the OPTION to toggle between old and new icons. Make the new icons beta feature. Opt-in.
    At any rate, the overview needs a facelift (target brackets left, colour tag right). We need added functionality to the overview. With that, the icons can be MUCH more useful.
    Also it it is not just 90% the scaling is universally bad.

    3) What are the reasons of the developer to believe the current icon set is an improvement over the previous suggested one? What made you not realize the obvious issues that would come with shipping this? What made you not react to the feedback in the sisi topic?

    4) Thank you, but maybe a new topic and devblog once this happens would be more useful because I'm pretty sure a lot of people don't bother reading any more :c Let your playerbase know more publicly that you're doing something about this. Give them hope.

    The last thing we want to happen is a second Incarna with 4 to 5 month wait for a change that should have been done in the first place.
    4 to 5 months. Think of that. Those are at least 3 new expansions, if you keep the schedule. That means the potential to lose even MORE people is higher than back in Incarna.
    Natya Mebelle
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #1454 - 2015-06-09 23:05:40 UTC
    Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
    1) Things shouldnt have icons just for the sake of having icons.

    2) Capital ships are big giant ships. You can tell what they are simply by looking at them in your overview.

    3) As for having to do a double check - honestly is that a problem? Most of combat navigation in eve is based upon ship size. So if you are in a battle cruiser - you dont want to let the small ship get under your guns or if you are in a frig you want to try to get under the guns of the larger ship, etc. . . But you still always have to look at the ship type because you know you want to know if a ship is logi or a brawler or is going to neut you or something or other.

    4) The icons do not convey enough information so, you still have to do your doubletake regardless of whether the icon shows you that it is a frig or not. So all CCP has done is clutter the overview without providing any new useful information. They have made it harder to conduct combat because now you cant see what is going on because of the blizzard of tiny pointless near identical shapes.
    1) I agree with you wholeheartedly c: sometimes, not having an icon at all is a much better indicator than any icon ever could do. Which is something I mentioned in my previous posts too.

    2) At a certain zoom level, the main screen becomes irrelevant. Then the overview window is the only thing you play with. And honestly, this has been displayed more than often enough, that people play far zoomed out to keep their performance levels up and play the rest of the game via overview.

    3) That is correct in a generic pvp environment, most of the time you look at the type anyway. So with the old icons, the intent to look at the type icon was to check something like "is this a command ship or is this a logi" or "is this an interdictor or an assault ship." With the current icons, the intention was to reduce this by one size. So if you wanted to check for logis by icon, there would only be one icon to check for, and not two any more. This would potentially reduce search-time. Of course, the endless argument of countless (that is, 5) tabs for dedicated anti-logistics hunters is another thing.
    But now, it is down to: "Is this a regular destroyer, a T3 destroyer or an interdictor". That is, if you can correctly decipher the icon as being destroyer sized to begin with. it means that... in theory... things can be narrowed down a bit further.

    4) This is true too, and the question is if they ever should. We can imagine there could be a way to add the top left corner an indicator of tech2, tech3 and faction into the overview, without cluttering the icon space itself. Art is science. So again, in THEORY the idea of breaking down ship types further would make it more useful to find the right target. In reality, the badly designed icons prohibit that :c


    Eraza wrote:
    Another thought, it's very stupid if the legal matter does work that way,
    because i'm pretty sure everyone drawing mock designs(many of the good ones JUST expanding on the original icons),
    is trying to help here, not making sure they draw the potential icons before CCP officially does, in some absurd legal scheme..

    Actually, I think I remember Arenanet saying something like that they cannot directly implement detailed player suggestions as it would have legal problems. But if we keep in CCP land, I'm not sure if you followed the legal issue about the alliance icons?
    Look at this for example. Apparently, CCP claims the IP on the derivative work that is caused by this grey noise filter. Apparently, that is legal and fine when it really should not be. But I don't want to make this thing an issue again, the devblog regarding the alliance icons and the related fuss is here .
    Chainsaw Plankton
    FaDoyToy
    #1455 - 2015-06-09 23:06:39 UTC
    Jeven HouseBenyo wrote:
    Dangeresque Too wrote:
    Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
    When I am in space and have a local, other chats, D-scan, overview, cargo, drones, and overview on my screen I can't see space at 100%, or my windows get resized to be too small to see what I want to see, at 90% I feel like I have a cluttered but mostly alright view

    90%: http://i.imgur.com/WYeAaWi.jpg
    100%: http://i.imgur.com/4uzetyb.jpg

    I didn't completely finish lining up everything on the 100% example. the cargo overlaps the 8th turret slot, and the local chat box is covered. I also forogt the d-scan window, but at 90% it kinda fits in with the chat boxes, at 100% it just blocks the view. I could also see putting it above the targeted items next to the overview, but then that might limit ability to drag targets to different rows.
    I've noticed a trend over the recent years of CCP working to remove as much utility space from our screens as possible. Making the minimum size of windows larger, text larger, etc. This ends up in situations where people have increasingly less "space scene" on their display, and more "internet spreadsheets".

    If they want to break away from that stereotype they need to upgrade the UI, and not by making things bigger. There was a nice pic shown at 2014 fanfest that showed a modern/futuristic UI that didn't look like spreadsheets in space, but we haven't heard a peep about it since.



    On the UI updates that have rolled out since I started (ignoring the icons bad! threadnaught) I'm set at 90% resolution for more screen space to work with due to windows expanding on me. Though I like the cleanup/streamlining to Industry that was once a confusing mess, that window EATS screen space hardcore. In scaling open windows so I can at least pretend to see what's going on, it's the tradeoff of being able to actually use the info in those open windows when I scale them and still leave viewing space for paranoia checks around my ships. At 100% scale, it simply can't happen. It is not from lack of inches on the monitor, it's a 32 inch screen area. Windows, open tabs, etc, are just getting bigger and bulkier, not a good thing for me when I have stuff open so I can prep for incoming troubles.

    >Jeven


    I think the main thing is I want more information now than I did years ago, I'm looking at screenshots from 2008 and my overview, selected items, and drone windows are all in the default place with my targets going across the top. My overview had icons and then distance, name, and type. And I have all my chat windows stacked in one window. From what I can see none of the UI elements got unnecessarily big. If anything today it is better now that there is the option to use compact member lists as chats tend to take up a large portion of my screen. I have more info in less space with UI scaling at 90%. and that I think most things just look better in general just helps

    And I agree the UI for Industry could use a bit of work, and does it really need an image preview bit? but I don't try and do industry when I'm flying around space so I'm not really worried about it in this scope.

    @ChainsawPlankto on twitter
    slphy vansyl
    angry squirrels
    #1456 - 2015-06-09 23:10:51 UTC
    hummm.. 30minutes to launch the game and...
    finally less than 5 minutes to use the "quit game" button! Blink
    this one works perfectly ^^
    dont change this icon!
    Jeven HouseBenyo
    Vanity Thy Name Is
    #1457 - 2015-06-09 23:14:12 UTC
    CCP Surge wrote:
    I just finished reading through the latest rounds of feedback, and we've discussed the situation internally in depth now. So here's where we're at now, and the options we're considering with the icons:


    1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.

    2. 90% UI scaling is definitely an issue, but a tricky one to solve. We we know its an underlying rendering issue that's been around much longer and not caused by the icons themselves, but one that's been suddenly and very clearly illuminated by their release. We want to keep 90% scaling as a option, but at the same time acknowledge that it will never look as good or be as cleanly supported as the other modes. We're also looking into whether we can easily add texture filtering which will make the icons smoother and slightly more readable at 90%.

    3. We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set (crosses vs brackets, vs Xs) and that many new icons are too detailed to identify quickly. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.

      4. While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape. I think this is at the root of many of your concerns, and we're now looking into what can be done to make groups of items slightly more distinctive, potentially giving people the option to use simpler group icons for brackets that's closer to the old system.

    4. We're meeting with the CSM later this week to discuss much of this feedback, and I'm sure many of your concerns will be represented as well. Either way the significance of this and your well reasoned responses in this thread aren't lost on us. I'll keep poking in here to keep you guys updated on any further actions coming with regards to the icons.


    Finally, at least a response! Thanks for that. If the 90% scaling is a known problem, I would suggest taking a hard look at fixing that before too many more fast track releases show up, now that it's becoming known that it's not a rare few using that scaling. Now you also know your customer base isn't completely full of 20/20 vision individuals, please take that into account on further upgrades to the graphics from here forward. The one that I have not found, which boggles my mind, is a simple 'contrast' and 'brightness' slider to adjust ingame graphics. That choice to use the 'classic' icons would also help with account activity retention.

    >Jeven

    Minny boat flyer, unofficial squeaky wheel.

    'Game Ethics and Morality Monitor' I remember promises.

    Snark at 11-24/7/365.25. Overshare? Yup.

    Yes it's my fault. And if you don't staap it I'll do it again. ;-P

    No you can't has my stuffs OR my SPs.
    Ben Zaye
    Harakiri Cleaning services
    #1458 - 2015-06-10 00:06:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ben Zaye
    CCP Surge wrote:
    I just finished reading through the latest rounds of feedback, and we've discussed the situation internally in depth now. So here's where we're at now, and the options we're considering with the icons:


    1. First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.
      2. ...


    Hello,

    Please, don't create another set of icons for the NPC ships. We already have a lot of new icons to remember. And an icon representing a ship type should be the same everywhere.
    There are other means for differentiating the NPC ship vs Players ship without changing icons.
    Kaarous Aldurald
    Black Hydra Consortium.
    #1459 - 2015-06-10 00:50:47 UTC
    CCP Surge wrote:

  • First we hear from many of you the difference between NPC and player ships is simply too subtle with the new icon set, and we're right now experimenting with alternatives to separate these groups more, maybe adding entirely new shapes for NPC ships to make them more clearly stand out from players.


    • Personally, I suggest a plus sign, possibly in the color red. Tongue in cheek aside, what on earth was wrong with the old system? If you saw red, you knew immediately that it was not a player ship.

    Quote:

  • We also hear the general usability concern that item "groups" are not as clearly differentiated as with the old set (crosses vs brackets, vs Xs) and that many new icons are too detailed to identify quickly. In the previous iteration the ISIS-based overview icons were pulled back for this very reason: they were too difficult to quickly make out at the smaller Overview size.

    • This is a huge understatement. Some of these are sufficiently indistinct as to blur the line between two or more ship hull size categories. It gets much worse if drones are involved, to the level of a goddamned nightmare.

    Say what you want about the old system, it was clear quickly what size ship you were dealing with, and whether said ship was a player or NPC vessel. It might have only done one thing, but it did it well.

    Quote:

    While we've added many new icons for separating types within a group, it has been at the cost of taking slightly longer to identify which group has appeared on grid (A player ship, NPC, or drone). It's also exacerbated by as-mentioned eyesight/accessibility problems and quick blob identification of a shape.


    I'll say this. I play EVE on a laptop. The recent changes have made the game much, much worse of an experience for me than it previously was. This far exceeds the problem with the instant popup tooltips.

    "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

    One of ours, ten of theirs.

    Best Meltdown Ever.
    Lantyss
    Silver Shield
    #1460 - 2015-06-10 01:48:39 UTC
    Well .... I read the post by CCP Surge several times and then ran the text through my version of the Universal Translator (with the BS filter activated) and was not surprised for the result to be "No reversion to old icons - CCP to make attempt to deceive players into thinking their comments are being considered seriously. Continue to stall and ignore the unacceptability of new icons. Carry on!"

    I've seen stuff like this before - in companies that no longer exist...