The new Expanded Inventory View design

[Vstarstruck]

Greetings,

We'd like to share a comment from Hiroshi Minagawa from the UI team in regards to the inventory display adjustments made in Patch 4.2.
We'd appreciate it if you all to continue to leave your feedback.

It gets old that you can't do this, cant do that because of the 1.0> 2.0 thing and still had to use 1.0's code as a base to cut corners and get it out faster. "Haste makes waste" as they say, and this will only continue to cause you problems in the future. Can you guys rework the code .. the core,, fixing all this while 4.xx is running and basically have a better structure for 5.0 +? How can you guys keep expanding this game with such a poor base? As you give us more items, we need more inventory space to hold those items. Your servers need more breathing room. I am sure this is also the reason Why we can't have a proper glam log and other things? If data usage is so bad with this spaghetti code why not remove repeated items in the game (may have to relay to the different development teams that are responsible of what materials go in the game and stuff along that nature) the meany copies of item icons for different items gets confusing too.

Does this mean our bag is stuck on 140 items forever? What is going to happen in the future? Future expansions? Right now using the dresser and chobobo bag is a chore, are there plans to improve this moving forward to 5.0 and beyond?

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

Shut down the servers and recode the game properly then. It gets old that you can't do this, cant do that because of the 1.0> 2.0 thing and still had to use 1.0's code as a base to cut corners and get it out faster.

I think about 90% of your posts have been complaints, why are you still here? They won't shut the game down, that would be a disaster. It was one thing to shut down the failed 1.0 server in the transition to 20. It would be a completely different thing to shut down a functional game just because. They would lose a ton of players.

[Vstarstruck]

I think about 90% of your posts have been complaints, why are you still here? They won't shut the game down, that would be a disaster. It was one thing to shut down the failed 1.0 server in the transition to 20. It would be a completely different thing to shut down a functional game just because. They would lose a ton of players.

I do not see them losing a ton of players if it means improving the game. From the sound of that post they may have to at some point. It is not a matter of IF, more like when. (Unless they can work a ton of magic while the servers are running, like preparing and releasing big changes for 5.0 as 4.xx is running.

What I do is none of your business though and sounds stalkerish (yeah i know public blahblah but you do not need to talk about my personal agendas in this thread)

Are we supposed to be happy and understanding that despite shutting down the servers these problems are still biting them? You can't rely on a flawed core if you want to keep growing. We're struggling to have the responsiveness that WoW had back in 2004 in a lot of areas still. No, shutting the servers down again won't fix it faster, they just have to actually work on it.

The wonders of these kind of games mostly having a skeleton crew between expansions.

My point said by someone else^

Weird, What I am reading is a general hate for the design of the core game and not hate for the comment. Also a question as to why SE hasn't put some priority into fixing this so the game can grow properly.

These are actually the real kind of answers we should see about housing and inventory it is very Blizzard. It doesn't mean it is going to be fixed. But it also means paying customers can voice their desire to have X function prioritized. This is literally a million times better then some figurehead trying to sell plushies.

Also if technical limitations(server load) are based on the actual inventory you are carrying. Why didn't the people in charge discuss alternative solutions that might require more storage but less server load? Chocob bag is an excellent example of alternative storage. Why people would like the moon. They would settle with just extra retainers, player storage chests and better itemization. This is a sign that one team refuses to work within the limitations of the game.



But all in all nice answer and Thanks.

That would be correct, and asking what can be done about it.

[Texa]

What I do is none of your business though and sounds stalkerish

[savageink]

I would prefer 4 up like the old view, but 2 up isn't that annoying. they did get rid of the useless slots that couldn't hold anything in the old view on the second tab. What I don't get is why they didn't add a chocobo bags tab to the inventory, instead of making it a completely separate window i have to dig through a menu to get to.

[Iscah]

What I don't get is why they didn't add a chocobo bags tab to the inventory, instead of making it a completely separate window i have to dig through a menu to get to.

That annoys me too, though on the other hand I'm guessing that since we have to transfer items between the two systems, having them display separately is what lets us have both inventories open at once while we do that.

[savageink]

That annoys me too, though on the other hand I'm guessing that since we have to transfer items between the two systems, having them display separately is what lets us have both inventories open at once while we do that.

I would think that even if they had to open it up as a separate window they could still put a chocobag button on the inventory window like the armory one.

[Cakekizyy]

I think about 90% of your posts have been complaints, why are you still here? They won't shut the game down, that would be a disaster. It was one thing to shut down the failed 1.0 server in the transition to 20. It would be a completely different thing to shut down a functional game just because. They would lose a ton of players.

What about have a team working to redo backend and just release it when it's done?

[TaranTatsuuchi]

And that's why no one is implying this. Bringing it up that it's important and that they should prioritize it doesn't mean we think they don't know. Those of us with experience in the field know that they know better than anyone how bad it really is and that they puke blood every single day making the game work as well as it does in the first place. But if they won't know it's as important to us as it is to them, they'll keep prioritizing other things. I've been in that mess before where infrastructure revamps were postponed because of new features and only when the clients settled down we could do the important work. So this is us, telling them, as much as the people in this thread can, "it's ok. Go for it. It's important to us too."
....

I have to echo this statement.

I keep seeing places where some limitation or another is hampering what the devs want to do with the game that I feel there needs to be some time spent to improve the underlying issues.



I can see that this would probably impact content releases, and that that wouldn't sit well with some.

But, you can only get so far treating the symptoms, the core issue will need to be resolved.