Removing "Custom" sort was awful, the "No Sort" option is worse than useless, it's counterproductive

Conan Exiles General Discussion Feedback
21

It didn’t, it would fill in an empty slot with anything new that you added to inventory, but everything that was already in the inventory stayed in the same spot they were in before the new item was added.

That was the advantage of Custom, if you put something in Row 2, Slot 4, that’s where it would still be any time you selected the Custom view.

If you, for example, changed your sort view to Heavy, and then to Named, and then back to Custom, that same item would still be in Row 2, Slot 4 unless you removed it from inventory while using the other views. Lots of players depended on this fact to organize their personal inventory, they would arrange the top 1-10 rows with items that they wanted to be certain would always be in the same place even if they temporarily switched to the other views. That’s the functionality that was lost when FunCom took Custom away and replaced it with the useless No Sort.

3 Likes
22

It’s not any more tricky than any other code change. There’s nothing especially “tricky” about creating a persistent Custom view.

23

It didn’t move anything. It simply showed the storage as it was stored in the container. The other sorts back then did nothing but change the display order but didn’t change anything in the storage itself. The sorts now change the order in the storage, and resort everytime you add something while active.

There is when you realize there is server performance and database size to worry about. If you save the position of every item under a custom sort, you double the size in memory of every storage container on the server.

One or two containers is negligible. Several thousand containers is another story. Again I’m not against this, but it is something that has to be taken into account. And something you want to test before applying it in a live patch affecting 6+ year old 12-20GB databases.

24

yeah , I noticed that, i keep throwing away stuff that i want to keep. It is very annoying. But tbh, I am also starting to get confused, with patch, hotfix and the changes not doing what you expect :slight_smile:

25

^ Yeah I have to agree with this, if I am getting it right.

CUSTOM = the sorting players chose himself. It would be handy if that sorting could change back after chosing “heaviest” and then switching it back.

Meanwhile NO SORTING = just no sorting. That option won’t and shouldn’t guarantee anyone to get back their pre-made order of the inventory items. Because that premade was custom, and it’s not an option anymore.

Anyone feel free to prove me wrong, maybe I am really missing something here. :smiley:

26

Agreed, and that’s why he’s wrong when he says, “No Sort does the same thing as Custom used to do.” Custom did something that No Sort does not do, that’s different, not the same.

27

That’s still not unusually “tricky”, and it still isn’t any more difficult to code “Especially bugfree on the first pass” than most other changes. Any change can be difficult to code “bugfree on the first pass”, that doesn’t qualify this change as extra “tricky”.

There is room to discuss possible solutions, but it still remains true that you’re trying to make this sound falsely complicated. Your previous statement, “Not impossible, just tricky. Especially bugfree on the first pass.” is not true.

Yes, of course you want to test it, because obviously, just like testing any change in the game. It’s pretty silly for you to state the obvious and then pretend that it’s an insightful observation. Stating the obvious as though it’s somehow meaningful or insightful is just blowing air over nothing.

28

You have way more faith in FC then most. :laughing:

29

Nope, swing and a miss, this isn’t about FunCom at all, it’s about the flawed logic you’re trying to present.

The point, which is true for any development shop having nothing at all to do with FC, is that this change is not uniquely “tricky”, nor does it have any testing requirements that are unusual. That’s a false depiction of the coding and testing requirements of making such a change.

30

The answer is simple, don’t have the other views resort objects in the array.

There’s no reason for Heaviest, Name, etc. to be persistent, everything but the default sort order should be visual only. Then it doesn’t matter what the default is called, Custom, No Sort, Uncle Bob, call it whatever you want. Any time someone opens a container (either personal inventory or shared storage) it defaults to the Default view, then they can temporarily use the visual sorts as much as they want without impacting the storage array at all.

Or, as an alternative, they could even allow the last view selected to be visually persistent but not affecting the actual sort order in the array or requiring extra memory for saving multiple sorts.

Step 1: A player opens a chest and they choose the “Heaviest” view. The game visually shows the items in Heaviest order but does not change the sort order in the array at all.

Step 2: The player exits the chest inventory. Nothing was changed in the storage order for the chest, so there is nothing to unchange, the items in the chest are still stored in the same order they were stored before the player opened the chest but the game remembers that the player’s last choice for sort view was Heaviest.

Step 3: The player opens a different chest, the game automatically displays the items in the new chest using the Heaviest view, because that was the last view the player chose for external storage boxes. Again, nothing is changed inside the array, but the player’s view choice is preserved when moving from box to box.

The game never has to store more than one copy of the array for any storage container, the only thing it has to do is “remember” what their last view was and use that same view when they open the next container.

Same thing with character inventory. There’s no reason to resort the array, there only needs to be one Default storage order in the array for the character’s inventory, and the game just “remembers” what their last view choice was.

This retains a default sort order in shared storage, and allows every player in the game to view storage using the view that they prefer, while at the same time preserving only one copy of the storage array for every container in the game. No extra memory or db storage is needed.

This maintains the game’s efficient use of the internal db and while maximizing individual player choice. That’s a win-win.

1 Like
31

I hate how my inventory is always auto sort, makes managing my supplies my own way, completely annoying and impossible!!!

2 Likes
32

Which undoes the auto-sort selected for that specific chest in the clan that was chosen. You’re looking to take away a feature that players are just now getting used to.

I get it, from a singleplayer point of view it doesn’t make much sense to set it up the way they have where the sorts are enforced for storage itself. But for those of us setting up storage for an entire clan to us, it makes perfect sense. And its why I asked for more sort options as well as the ability to sort in ascending or descending.

But I will take this stance. Custom sort should be reimplemented in an advanced form. It SHOULD save the storage in the way I mentioned before. The consequences of doing so are irrelevant. We both get what we want.

33

Yes I am, because players didn’t want that in the first place, which is clearly evidenced by the volume of threads complaining about this change.

No, you don’t get it, it’s not just single player. People in clans are unhappy with the change. People on Official servers are unhappy with the change. People on private servers are unhappy with the change. People on PvP are unhappy with the change. People on PvE are unhappy with the change. People on every gaming platform are unhappy with the change.

And the reason all of those poeple are complaining is that the change screwed up their personal inventory, that carries much more weight than any argumenet about shared inventory.

You want believe that because you like it, but in all of the threads you’ve been arguing with people about this you’re the only one. I agree with a statement you made before, facts are not democratic, but what you’re overlooking is that preferences are. A clear majority of people are unhappy that their personal inventory as been screwed up and they don’t care about the implications for shared storage even if those implications are positive.

Improving shared storage is nice, but not at the cost of messing up people’s personal inventory. Individual inventory is always more important than shared storage.

Here’s a counterpoint that you need to think about - like you, I am the person “setting up storage for an entire clan”. I build, place, arrange, organize and re-organize almost all of the shared storage in my clan. I do the same job you do, and I think this change was terrible. So don’t think for a minute that you speak for other clan organizers, I too am the organizer for my clan and we’ve been arguing opposite sides of this issue for pages now. You like it (and fair enough you’re entitled to like it) but in no way does that mean you speak for clan organizers as a whole.

It didn’t improve the management of shared storage in the slightest. In fact, clan storage is now easier to screw up than before. All it takes is one person to choose “Heaviest” for the clan vault and suddenly the vault is completely screwed up with no way to recover except by laboriously re-organizing everything again. All it takes is one person to choose “Heaviest” in a chest, or a cupboard. and suddenly the chest or cupboard is completely screwed up with no way to recover except by laboriously re-organizing everything again.

You can’t force everyone in the clan to leave the sort order alone, they have to be allowed to view items in shared storage however they want to, and when they do so the new system irrevocably screws up the default storage order. This change has created more work for clan organizers, not less. All it takes is for one person to click on a different sort order and now the order is screwed up.

Yes, more sort options would be good but… no matter how many sort options FC might add the fundamental problem will still exist. What people want is for their own personal inventory to be inviolable, un-screw-up-able, they want to know that when they choose the default order for items inside their inventory they come back to that sort order no matter what other views they choose temporarily. And they don’t care if changes improve shared storage, the single most important thing is that their personal inventory is under their own control, no matter what, this is exactly what people have been complaining about for the past two weeks. We can agree that more views would be good, but we only agree on that if they are only views and don’t affect the default sort order at all.

There should be only one sort option that changes the order of objects inside the array, all other sort options should be view only. That’s the only answer that gives everyone what they want, that’s the only win-win solution.

1 Like
34

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.