open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked How many do not load station, but would if it was easier?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.08.04 20:41:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: E man Industries on 04/08/2011 20:41:41
Right now I do NOT load the station as i run dual clients. I can run dual Incarna but it makes a lot of noise(damn fans).

I do not mind Incarna but I can't use it. If i want to see a station I need to navigate an escape menu and clic an option then undock and redock...then do the same to turn it off.

This is wrong!

We should be able to set what we default to..ie default to ship view, or default to station view. With a quick embark/disembark button.

Also can we get stats on just what % of active players have turned it off?

Tom Gerard
Caldari
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2011.08.04 20:58:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Tom Gerard on 04/08/2011 20:58:42
I don't load station because I have an older computer. To make up the GHZ difference I do the some of the calculations on paper and punch them in. It really takes a long time to calculate all the different shaders manually.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Image Linkage

BehindDOORNEXWhore
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:00:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: BehindDOORNEX***** on 04/08/2011 21:00:50
Isn't that like a "Chad" ?

Edit because I splell kile a ratd

Myfanwy Heimdal
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:06:00 - [4]
 

I haven't seen a Hollerith card for decades. Batch processing an MMO, now, that's real programming.

Solosky
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:29:00 - [5]
 

Incarna characters are beautiful (compare with LotRO or Warhammer Online). CCP, please, don't lower graphics - most EVE players aren't in 3rd world countries and can purchase modern computers every other year (or every other month in some cases) + we really don't need the game to be compatible with wrist watch, microwave ovens, fridges and 5-10 year old calculators which some people mistakenly call "computer" while trying to use as game rig for EVE.

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:35:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Solosky
Incarna characters are beautiful (compare with LotRO or Warhammer Online). CCP, please, don't lower graphics - most EVE players aren't in 3rd world countries and can purchase modern computers every other year (or every other month in some cases) + we really don't need the game to be compatible with wrist watch, microwave ovens, fridges and 5-10 year old calculators which some people mistakenly call "computer" while trying to use as game rig for EVE.


Not a whine on what it takes to run. A whine on how hard it is to turn on once off. Also the door is terrible.

Ava n'Daara
Posted - 2011.08.04 21:51:00 - [7]
 

I left CQ up for a bit initially but, quite frankly, there's no added gameplay experience supplied with CQ and it runs, relatively, like crap despite having a solid system that can run everything on max.

I have been shown the door. :(

Telvani
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
Posted - 2011.08.04 22:43:00 - [8]
 

Yes CCP make your game use up as much resources as possible so only the coolest of the cool can run it, despite it running on pretty much anything pre-incarna.

Let the nerd population's overspending on hardware instead of going out and having a life outside the game be justified.




Deviana Sevidon
Gallente
Panta-Rhei
Butterfly Effect Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.04 22:55:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Telvani
Yes CCP make your game use up as much resources as possible so only the coolest of the cool can run it, despite it running on pretty much anything pre-incarna.

Let the nerd population's overspending on hardware instead of going out and having a life outside the game be justified.






That sounds bitter.
I remember having the same discussion with players who argued 8bit or 16bit computers were sufficient for gaming. 3D graphics a waste of ressources etc.

Upgrades are a neccessary part of PC gaming.

Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.04 22:57:00 - [10]
 

I would. I don't bother right now since it doesn't have much functionality and I don't want to wait for it to load every time, and the fact that it does run kind of slow...

Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.08.04 22:58:00 - [11]
 

I have a Q6600, 8GB and a ATI 6800. With dual clients running, having at least one in station sends all 4 cores to 80-90%...
Having both in space - maybe 30-40%...

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.04 23:28:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Selinate
I would. I don't bother right now since it doesn't have much functionality and I don't want to wait for it to load every time, and the fact that it does run kind of slow...
^^ That. Even my Air can handle the CQ well enough, but there's simply nothing to gain from turning it on — it's entirely pointless.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.08.04 23:32:00 - [13]
 

I would if it took far less computer resources so that i saw no dicernable speed dip playing WoT and logged in also to globaly agenda and I could jump up and down and make funny faces in the mirror in the room.

and i'm not kidding.

I've been trying out global agenda and I quite like chaninging the color of my clothes and bouncing around station, pacing or using my jet pack and pummeting down turing it off and taking damage when i hit ground.

Avatars that you can do silly things with are fun.

Morganta
Posted - 2011.08.05 00:03:00 - [14]
 

if you don't load station then how will you know if it gets better?

Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.05 00:07:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Selinate on 05/08/2011 00:06:53
Originally by: Morganta
if you don't load station then how will you know if it gets better?


These forums will start ****ting themselves when the station environment gets better.

Raid'En
Posted - 2011.08.05 00:27:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Morganta
if you don't load station then how will you know if it gets better?

you can have CQs turned off on tranquility and have a look at singularity when new stuff appear.

Kijo Rikki
Caldari
Point of No Return
Waterboard
Posted - 2011.08.05 00:53:00 - [17]
 

To me, the new station feature is exactly like the intro screen to a dvd movie. It may be slick looking, but its utterly useless. OFF

Bayard Carpathi
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:16:00 - [18]
 

I kept it on for a few days. I think it's great and I'm looking forward to where they go with it in the future. However, when running two (or three clients)it does unpleasent things to my computer.

So it's off and I see no reason to turn it back on until they do something "new" with it, but unless it uses less system resources I cant imagine it staying on long.

When the stations get opened up though, that could be worth messing with.

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:18:00 - [19]
 

I kept it on at first, just to see what it would be like. After enduring the loading screen several times just to get what I already knew to be soul-crushingly pointless fluff, I turned it off and never looked back. As an added bonus The Door loads instantly.

Vol Arm'OOO
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:29:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Deviana Sevidon
Originally by: Telvani
Yes CCP make your game use up as much resources as possible so only the coolest of the cool can run it, despite it running on pretty much anything pre-incarna.

Let the nerd population's overspending on hardware instead of going out and having a life outside the game be justified.






That sounds bitter.
I remember having the same discussion with players who argued 8bit or 16bit computers were sufficient for gaming. 3D graphics a waste of ressources etc.

Upgrades are a neccessary part of PC gaming.


This would be true if cq did something. All you can do is walk around and sit down. Hardly worth it, especially since it lags out the rest of your game.

Also it should be pointed out that there are many other mmos where you can actually walk around and do stuff -- kill things, interact with your envior, and they dont seem to cause the problems that cq causes even though cq doesnt have any content. So all in all, if you are playing eve to actaully play the game then turning cq off makes perfect sense.

Blind Man
Caldari
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:44:00 - [21]
 

I can't run incarna at 60 fps (running @3510x1920).
annoys me and does not "feel" like eve.

i just want the default hangar view back.

but i still don't turn off cq because that would be even worse

Tsukimaru
Amarr
Stargate SG-1
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:50:00 - [22]
 

If they make it light enough to run 4+ clients on one machine without lagging, I'll load the station.

Nyio
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.08.05 01:59:00 - [23]
 

I don't load the CQ, at first because my 9800 GT graphics card couldn't handle it well at all.

Now I just got this GTX 570 and it can handle it but it still seems to be heavy on resources, and doesn't load nearly as fast as it would have to for me to activate and use the CQ.

I can add that I'm mainly a missioner, and even the regular docking process can take too long at times.

@CCP: please make us be able to doubleclick the door™ to open the active ships cargo.

Tu Ko
Predator's Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.05 02:17:00 - [24]
 

" I think it's great and I'm looking forward to where they go with it in the future."

Ya'll kill me with this stuff. Obviously its terrible, but with the magic of wishful thinking we can assume that CCP will come in and do something cool with it... Just like PI.

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:21:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Ava n'Daara
I left CQ up for a bit initially but, quite frankly, there's no added gameplay experience supplied with CQ and it runs, relatively, like crap despite having a solid system that can run everything on max.

I have been shown the door. :(

this.

CQ is nothing in terms of computer processing but even on the lowest settings is harder to run then starcraft 2 on the lowest settings.
if CQ ran as smoothe as eve in space i would use it no problem, though it is 100% pointless and old hanger was better

Selinate
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:25:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Herping yourDerp

CQ is nothing in terms of computer processing but even on the lowest settings is harder to run then starcraft 2 on the lowest settings.
if CQ ran as smoothe as eve in space i would use it no problem, though it is 100% pointless and old hanger was better


Considering how games by blizzard are made (to run on machines that are ancient because the graphics in them are most often very simple, nothing extravagant), I don't know if comparing any game that actually makes an attempt at having good graphics is valid...

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:32:00 - [27]
 

i'm sorry but WOW on lowest detail looks better then CQ... its the ratio of graphics for performance ratio in CQ that is horrid. eve for the longest time has had decent graphics and it performed pretty well on almost all machines... in CQ though, even higher end machines cant handle it and the graphics and everything look worse then games that run better and came out years ago.

Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:34:00 - [28]
 

I would if there was a compelling reason to. Any reason at all really.

I do all my ship spinning in the fitting window these days.

Large Collidable Object
morons.
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:44:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Large Collidable Object on 05/08/2011 03:52:50
Originally by: Selinate


Considering how games by blizzard are made (to run on machines that are ancient because the graphics in them are most often very simple, nothing extravagant), I don't know if comparing any game that actually makes an attempt at having good graphics is valid...


So what? My hooded amarr alt looks like thief III looked 7 years ago, has inferior animations, more clipping problems, less realistic lighting and takes place in a prison cell that is more confined and offers less interaction than the one that was delivered in the first 2 minutes of Oblivion.

The main difference is the fact I played those games 3 gpu generations before my current one and they offered far better performance.

Considering the OP - no - I wouldn't. It's entirely useless.

Corina's Bodyguard
Posted - 2011.08.05 03:48:00 - [30]
 

Unless it was made well and loaded as fast as the pre-Incarna hanger, I won't use it.

I dock/undock a lot, and the 20 seconds loading time is really a killer on my productivity.


Pages: [1] 2

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