open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Compromise solution
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.09.02 12:46:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 13:09:10
OK, if we absolutely must have CQ as the only option eventually, then, as soon as the technical problems are fixed (fried computers, etc.), at least have the same functionality as we used to have:-

1) When logging into CQ, you are facing your spaceship out on the balcony (or have the option to log into telly screen or balcony). You can instantly see your ship as soon as you log.

2) You can doubleclick, R-click on your spaceship, and drag and drop as before. (Edit: you'd have to be "frozen" on balcony log-in, with non-WiS mouse functionality until you hit WAS or D, for this to work)

3) The lore is fixed to make sense of pilots casually decanting from their pods every time they dock.

Spinning per se I don't care as much about. It was fun and we were very used to it, but you can still do it in fittings window to a minor extent.

It's that slick functionality I want back. Instant recognition of the ship, quicker access to functions - more redundancy, like we had before.

I would much prefer the return of the Hangar, and CQ an option off of that, but the above would be sufficient compromise.

And don't ignore the lore fix, you'd get a lot of bang for the buck out of that. Believe it or not, many people like the lore of your game and care about it, and have it as part of their immersion factor.

Dee Luxx
Gallente
Posted - 2011.09.02 12:59:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Dee Luxx on 02/09/2011 13:02:37
Edited by: Dee Luxx on 02/09/2011 13:02:02
Wow a rational constructive post. No pitchfork, torch or four letter words. Thank you OP. These are probably the sort of posts CCP would look at.

And I agree completely. Perhaps have the hangar return just as before and down in the lower left corner you have the traditional undock button pointing to the right and below that a new 'Enter Captain's Quarters' below it pointing left. Clicking this new button loads the default view we experience now.


The Old Chap
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:04:00 - [3]
 

Like it.

Re: the lore, that's simple: how about capsuleers being required to sign the visitors book personally every time they dock?

Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:08:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: The Old Chap
Like it.

Re: the lore, that's simple: how about capsuleers being required to sign the visitors book personally every time they dock?


That's a good point, but I was thinking more from the point of view of the absence of the technical problems that made decanting relatively rarer in the past - i.e. "stunning technical breakthrough now makes decanting less disorienting and troublesome than before".

Qansh
Gallente
Triskelion Ouroboros
Posted - 2011.09.02 14:12:00 - [5]
 

I understand that this is a thread about compromise, but I think that it would be hard, on an emotional level, for me to compromise.

It is simply too logical that one would see his ship in the hanger per the old view and, upon decanting, perhaps not even be in a position to see his ship directly, were it small and far away and provided that the logic of docking above bays still held true.

The whole thing feels like a kludge: "We want them to see their ship but we don't want the old spinning-style, so let's float the ship closer. But putting it there will mean that we need the pod right there too, so let's show that they've decanted on a rail close to the ship. We don't have to change the old docking bays because they'll just assume that there's a bay beneath their feet or that they're just for arrival or maintenance. This way they get to see their ships and we get to shepherd them to the NeX store. As far as putting those Minmatar CQs in everywhere? Don't worry. It's only temporary."

It's like CCP used to be HP, the perfect "monks" of a certain expression of a state of mind, but then Carly Fiorina took over (if you get the reference).

If they were like the early HP guys, they'd have said, "The ship docks. Either the camera drones have remained on or the pilot has logged onto the hanger cameras. He's sitting in his pod. He can choose to disembark or not. Reality."

I just fear that anything else that's added will feel like more kludge, starting with the lore (do we really want Tony Gonzales to treat CQ this way?). What should happen, by all rights, is that when you leave that pod, you do have less functionality (as they seem to suggest) unless you attend to a terminal. That's kind of the point of becoming unplugged. The problem is that we are illogically forced into that when staying plugged-in was supposed to have its merits.

Now, I do think that, technically and in terms of realism and potential, Incarna rocks. It has me salivating for a ride (once I get through that door!) that I do want to take. But, given what EVE is in the hearts of many, it's a shame that it was offered along the lines of "Throw them a bone. They'll accept it."

Starlight Kouvo
Posted - 2011.09.02 14:33:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 13:09:10
1) When logging into CQ, you are facing your spaceship out on the balcony (or have the option to log into telly screen or balcony). You can instantly see your ship as soon as you log.

Is it THAT important to be looking at your ship when you dock?
Have to admit I came to EVE only a month ago and only known the "CQ" but appears to be a lot of toys out the pram over the old system change.

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 13:09:10
2) You can doubleclick, R-click on your spaceship, and drag and drop as before. (Edit: you'd have to be "frozen" on balcony log-in, with non-WiS mouse functionality until you hit WAS or D, for this to work)

It's that slick functionality I want back. Instant recognition of the ship, quicker access to functions - more redundancy, like we had before.


You do know you can HOT KEY all the access you want so just a key press will access the cargo or the ship hanger or the Station Hold or the agent finder, etc, even less action required than moving the mouse and you dont even have to be looking at the ship. Dont see a time delay there.

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 13:09:10
OK, if we absolutely must have CQ as the only option eventually, then, as soon as the technical problems are fixed (fried computers, etc.), at least have the same functionality as we used to have:-



Guess some people have some very old hardware Sad
Its part of computing and progress that the game is going to get more graphic intense as time progresses otherwise we might as well all go back to the granddaddy of this type of game and play "Elite".

Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:14:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 19:19:08
Originally by: Starlight Kouvo
Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian on 02/09/2011 13:09:10
1) When logging into CQ, you are facing your spaceship out on the balcony (or have the option to log into telly screen or balcony). You can instantly see your ship as soon as you log.

Is it THAT important to be looking at your ship when you dock?
Have to admit I came to EVE only a month ago


Then there's no need for you to stick your oar in on a matter that relates to features that were in before you came in, is there?

This relates to functionality that was habitual and ingrained in a lot of people for a long, long time. It's something that everyone who played the game was used to. Of course we can work around it - the point is, why should we?

Normally, "adapt or die" is a valid argument when the proposed change has some rationale that purportedly improves the game. There is no rationale for getting rid of Hangar, gameplay-wise. For most older players, it's a been a downgrade.

The only 2 vaguely possible valid arguments are: 1) it would have been technically too difficult to retain Hangar and CQ together, and 2) CQ is supposed to be an improvement in immersion.

To 1) I would say that's a fairly pathetic excuse, and to 2) I would say that actually, forcing CQ on a whole bunch of players who didn't want it has broken their immersion with the game. That's part of the reason why they're finding it easier to unsubscribe than it otherwise might have been.

i.e., instead of adding another layer of immersion, as CCP advertised WiS would do, for many years, it's actually taken away a basic layer of immersion that was already there and strongly established.

I'm a player who was really looking forward to Incarna and WiS. But what I was looking forward to was something that was optional, as was promised (and as fit with the established lore), and that was good enough and interesting enough in itself, such that loads of people would have wanted to explore it anyway, without being forced to.

I understand that, as a new player, you're seeing all this trouble and you don't want people to "rock the boat", as it were, with your new-found pleasurable pastime, you want the game to last for a good time longer, and it seems that all these people complaining must be turning people away.

I can assure you that what's turning the people away is the things the complainers are complaining about. This is not your average nerdrage, this is becoming a meltdown of NGE proportions, and the missing Hangar view, the compulsory CQ, the ridiculously over-priced MT, the "Fearless" newsletter, the continued contempt for their established playerbase being shown by CCP, etc., etc., etc. - all these are conspiring to keep the rage fuelled.

Simetraz
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:47:00 - [8]
 

Actually 99% of the time when I am docking I want to drop something off in my hanger.

Can we add a option to dump to local inventory ?

And that little halo of your ship has everything you need.
How about facing that on log in ?

It was missing some capital ship options though last time I checked, which to be honest was some time ago, so I am not sure if they added those in there.


Callic Veratar
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:55:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Then there's no need for you to stick your oar in on a matter that relates to features that were in before you came in, is there?

This relates to functionality that was habitual and ingrained in a lot of people for a long, long time. It's something that everyone who played the game was used to. Of course we can work around it - the point is, why should we?

Normally, "adapt or die" is a valid argument when the proposed change has some rationale that purportedly improves the game. There is no rationale for getting rid of Hangar, gameplay-wise. For most older players, it's a been a downgrade.

The only 2 vaguely possible valid arguments are: 1) it would have been technically too difficult to retain Hangar and CQ together, and 2) CQ is supposed to be an improvement in immersion.

To 1) I would say that's a fairly pathetic excuse, and to 2) I would say that actually, forcing CQ on a whole bunch of players who didn't want it has broken their immersion with the game. That's part of the reason why they're finding it easier to unsubscribe than it otherwise might have been.

i.e., instead of adding another layer of immersion, as CCP advertised WiS would do, for many years, it's actually taken away a basic layer of immersion that was already there and strongly established.

I'm a player who was really looking forward to Incarna and WiS. But what I was looking forward to was something that was optional, as was promised (and as fit with the established lore), and that was good enough and interesting enough in itself, such that loads of people would have wanted to explore it anyway, without being forced to.

I understand that, as a new player, you're seeing all this trouble and you don't want people to "rock the boat", as it were, with your new-found pleasurable pastime, you want the game to last for a good time longer, and it seems that all these people complaining must be turning people away.

I can assure you that what's turning the people away is the things the complainers are complaining about. This is not your average nerdrage, this is becoming a meltdown of NGE proportions, and the missing Hangar view, the compulsory CQ, the ridiculously over-priced MT, the "Fearless" newsletter, the continued contempt for their established playerbase being shown by CCP, etc., etc., etc. - all these are conspiring to keep the rage fuelled.


If people are going to rage on the forums, everyone should be encouraged to speak up. Especially new players, because they're opinion is just as valid, if not more so, as they can bring fresh, new ideas. If the game was left to the desires of the veterans, the 20k subscribers would still be playing Trinity or Apocrypha.

Looking at CQ and Hangar, I can already see the insane number of complaints that would come up if it was Space <> Hangar <> CQ instead of the current Space <> Hangar/CQ. Why do I have to load TWICE? Why does it take so long to get to an establishment? Why can't I just go straight to my CQ?

We've seen how well "optional" features work, like FW. If players don't HAVE to participate, the majority WON'T.

To compare these changes to something like the NGE or any apocalyptic scenario is extreme exaggeration that's totally unnecessary. Nothing about the actual game has changed except that you're a person now, instead of a set of ship. Sure the lore doesn't exactly line up, but it's far from the global retcon many games get every time an expansion is released.

Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.09.03 03:12:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Callic Veratar

To compare these changes to something like the NGE or any apocalyptic scenario is extreme exaggeration that's totally unnecessary.


Well, we'll see, won't we?

It's not so much the changes in and of themselves, it's what the changes, and the way they've been done, and the information that was leaked, reveals about how CCP view the game, their players, etc.

The big difference with this situation and the NGE is that this is more "slow burn". NGE was catastrophic, this is more like a kind of fairly fast-working degenerative disease of some kind.

The main linking thread, though, is this: that in both cases, the people responsible for the game decided that they wanted another, bigger audience, and in the course of pursuing that audience, forgot about their core players - indeed, treated them with apparent contempt.

This might not matter so much in your average themepark MMO, but it matters quite a lot in a sandbox like SWG or EVE, as SOE found out, and as CCP will, I think, discover.

Why does it matter, not to alienate your core players in a sandbox game? Because, notoriously, in a sandbox, a fair chunk of the "content" - i.e. the stuff that players do and get exercised by - is created by the players.

Dane El
Posted - 2011.09.03 03:17:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian
Spinning per se I don't care as much about. It was fun...


Ship spinning was fun? I always treated it as only slightly better than just sitting and staring at the screen doing nothing. So its marginally better than staring at the door. What I miss is the ability to interact with my current ship without opening the ships window.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only