165 replies to this topic

[Lindonius]

Tesunie, on 18 May 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

The old UI was causing coding problems and slowing down progress and cash grabs. Though the new UI may seem "less functional" to us players, from my understanding, it is "more functional" to the game developers, letting them get more cash grabs out faster and smoother.

Fixed that for you.

Edited by Lindonius, 18 May 2014 - 06:58 PM.

[Dymlos2003]

Lindonius, on 18 May 2014 - 06:58 PM, said:

Fixed that for you.

People need to stop using that word.

[Sephlock]

Space Odin, on 18 May 2014 - 04:47 PM, said:

or at least an option to use the old UI?

The old UI was also bad but still better than the new one. I think that says a lot.

Wolfways, on 18 May 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

I find that the old UI was more user friendly.

Are you sure you want to revert to UI 1.0?

Ok Cancel

No really, are you really REALLY sure?

Ok Cancel

No seriously, are you double dog sure?

Ok Cancel

[Tesunie]

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 06:48 PM, said:

But this is a totally silly perspective to take.

I mean, why would you WANT to click a bunch of extra times? Wouldn't you PREFER if the interface required fewer clicks, and common tasks were streamlined?

If everyone had your perspective, then we'd all be using a console interface for everything and wouldn't have graphical interfaces at all.. because, hey, I don't mind learning a bunch of console commands and typing everything in with the keyboard.

Of course I would prefer fewer clicks to get what I want done, but I don't overly mind at the same time a few extra clicks either.

I believe you are taking a small portion of my remark and exploding it into something it was not intended to be... I hope this isn't an indicator of something, as I was holding you in far more respect.

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 06:48 PM, said:

A lot of mechwarrior fans fall into the somewhat more, shall we say, geeky part of the spectrum compared to many games. A lot of us have computer science degrees (and some of us are actual professional software developers). And as I pointed out, the kinds of stuff we're talking about here is extremely simple, fundamental stuff. Pretty much every single Computer Science major will have covered the basics here in a freshman or sophomore level course.

However, your skepticism is perfectly fine. Just because someone says something isn't reason for you to believe it. However, if you doubt the things that I've presented here, then I'd urge you to go and educate yourself and investigate the mountains of literature on the subject. You don't need to take my word for it, because the resources exist for you to learn about basic UI design principles yourself.

I have a degree in Graphic Design. I believe my above post should have helped to clarify that point, as I explained things from a design standpoint. I also am not saying UI2.0 is perfect, because it is not. However, it is functional and it is workable. It isn't game breaking and it isn't preventing me from playing the game. It could use a lot of work still.


I do notice that you ignored certain parts of my posts (the bottom section) which would lead to more productive posts and threads describing the problem, with a larger push on presenting solutions than just "bellyaching" over UI2.0.

UI 2.0 is here to stay for a while. We aren't going to get UI1.5 back. We might as well adapt to what we have now for the moment, and then make suggestions and nicely worded opinions about the system to try and help PGI improve the system overall. Right now, all we are doing is complaining about the current UI, and I see very little productive chatter to help improve the system. AKA: I see people trying to shout over the other people, and are flaming/trolling anyone who disagrees with them. Then we have two camps, "defenders" and "attackers", in each subject. We defenders mention that UI is flawed, but does work. Attackers take this as us saying it's perfect and is fine as it is. We defenders than have to defend ourselves and restate that it is flawed, but functional. Then the attackers continue to berate us saying how... and the cycle continues.

Instead of continuing the "attack and defend" cycle, we could break the cycle and instead present the issues at hand and come up with solutions and concepts to improve the system together. This approach would leave people not feeling like they have to defend the UI or attack it, and instead open more doors to communicate and present as many options to solve the problem at hand.

[Roland]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Obviously it needs work. What is annoying is saying that it's downright broken and terrible which is far from the truth. That and the fact you use hyperbole to try and get your point across. It needs updates but what we don't need is your psuedo-intellectual talk and all the people posting about how the UI IS TERRIBLE without posting about what it is that is truly bothering them. I count 3+ today?

That and I can't stop reading your posts in Squidward's voice now. Argh

You should be advised that I am in no way threatened by your ignorance, or your inability to grasp fairly basic scientific concepts. Your attempt to handwave away established design principles using, of all things, a sponge-bob square-pants reference just further highlights how ridiculous you are.

Again, the fact that you don't understand any of it is not a problem for me. That's why it wasn't addressed to you.. because frankly, it's been explained to you previously, and you don't understand it. The explanation was made to those who asked about the types of objective measurements that one can use to evaluate a user interface.

[Lostdragon]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Obviously it needs work. What is annoying is saying that it's downright broken and terrible which is far from the truth. That and the fact you use hyperbole to try and get your point across. It needs updates but what we don't need is your psuedo-intellectual talk and all the people posting about how the UI IS TERRIBLE without posting about what it is that is truly bothering them. I count 3+ today?

UI 2.0 is terrible and here is a non-comprehensive list of some of the reasons why it is terrible:

1. It still consumes massive amounts of resources
2. It is unintuitive
3. Getting the information you need is much harder than it should be
4. Building a mech is needlessly complicated and convoluted (really, this could be said of the UI in general)
5. Commonly accessed elements are spread all over the screen
6. Moving things between mechs is a chore, it is difficult to find what you need if you don't remember which mech was using it last, then when you find it transferring it to another mech takes way too many clicks
7. The button used to save mech builds is labeled "Checkout", which is confusing as hell for first time users, especially if they are not buying anything but simply changing a loadout using equipment that is already owned
8. The flaws in the UI slow down the process of being able to get into the game
9. We told PGI all of this prior to the release of the UI, they didn't listen and apparently think it is the greatest thing since sliced bread

[Dymlos2003]

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

You should be advised that I am in no way threatened by your ignorance, or your inability to grasp fairly basic scientific concepts. Your attempt to handwave away established design principles using, of all things, a sponge-bob square-pants reference just further highlights how ridiculous you are.

Again, the fact that you don't understand any of it is not a problem for me. That's why it wasn't addressed to you.. because frankly, it's been explained to you previously, and you don't understand it. The explanation was made to those who asked about the types of objective measurements that one can use to evaluate a user interface.

I understand it perfectly fine as Tesunie has said. It gets the job done and needs some work. No where near "terrible."

I'm sorry for offending you with squidward though. Atleast Bishop understands what I'm talking about.

[Red1769]

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

I seriously doubt it.. Although, I would be willing to accept that you perhaps didn't know what it was that you were looking for, and thus didn't notice that you didn't see it.

I'll only address this point, as Tesunie got everything else. If you don't want to believe me, fine. But I double checked my mechs before launching, except the weapons groups on my stalker (bad idea as it did mess with them, should've checked before launching in it). And found out what they had, their armor rating, speed, everything I wanted to know with no problem. The first thing I did was get mildly aquainted(sp) with it. But hey, it's just the internet, no one knows for sure unless you're right there, and all you have is my word on it. A bit different than those HCI principles and such that you guys are talking about, which could be true, and I may just educate myself a little about that in between job searching.

But alas, I think I'll just agree to disagree with those that think the frontend is total ****. That said, I think this is the very first thread about the UI, at least that I've read, that actually started talking about the technicalities of UI design of any sort of depth (like what you were doing with the rest of your post a little bit, but I am tired at the time of this post and just skimmed it). Perhaps a more specific breakdown of each principle, how it fails or succeeds in various people's eyes, and maybe even source links to those principles. My major was in a completely different part of the computer world (computer information systems, not science), so I'm not entirely educated on that. In other words, what Tesunie is saying in his later paragraphs in his latest post. I won't post in here anymore, but may still keep watch to see if any more educating things is brought up.

Edited by Red1769, 18 May 2014 - 07:16 PM.

[Captain Stiffy]

Ecrof, on 18 May 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

Click click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click clickClick click click click click

MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP* MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK *BEEP*

[Dymlos2003]

Lostdragon, on 18 May 2014 - 07:07 PM, said:

UI 2.0 is terrible and here is a non-comprehensive list of some of the reasons why it is terrible:

1. It still consumes massive amounts of resources (Needs optimzation)
2. It is unintuitive (Buzzword)
3. Getting the information you need is much harder than it should be (Should have a toggle but it's there)
4. Building a mech is needlessly complicated and convoluted (No it's not, it's really easy actually)
5. Commonly accessed elements are spread all over the screen (It's actually all in the top left corner but go on)
6. Moving things between mechs is a chore, it is difficult to find what you need if you don't remember which mech was using it last, then when you find it transferring it to another mech takes way too many clicks (Minimum of 5 clicks *ouch*)
7. The button used to save mech builds is labeled "Checkout", which is confusing as hell for first time users, especially if they are not buying anything but simply changing a loadout using equipment that is already owned (You get used to it dunno why this is a point)
8. The flaws in the UI slow down the process of being able to get into the game (It takes a few seconds)
9. We told PGI all of this prior to the release of the UI, they didn't listen and apparently think it is the greatest thing since sliced bread (Umm no)

LETS GO

Edited by Dymlos2003, 18 May 2014 - 07:16 PM.

[Captain Stiffy]

Lostdragon, on 18 May 2014 - 07:07 PM, said:

6. Moving things between mechs is a chore, it is difficult to find what you need if you don't remember which mech was using it last, then when you find it transferring it to another mech takes way too many clicks

This is intentional and they have said so. They didn't want to make it "too easy for players to reuse equipment".

I'm sick as **** of game companies expecting us to "understand" design choices because it profits THEM.

Design is ******* dead, long reign the dollar.

[Dymlos2003]

Captain Stiffy, on 18 May 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

This is intentional and they have said so. They didn't want to make it "too easy for players to reuse equipment".

I'm sick as **** of game companies expecting us to "understand" design choices because it profits THEM.

Design is ******* dead, long reign the dollar.

It's like... they are a business or something because they want to make money. How awful.

[Captain Stiffy]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

It's like... they are a business or something because they want to make money. How awful.

It's like... they know they are doing ****** things their players don't want and expect us to "understand" that they want to bleed us for more so they 'have to' have a **** design.

also
MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK

Edited by Captain Stiffy, 18 May 2014 - 07:15 PM.

[Dymlos2003]

Captain Stiffy, on 18 May 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

It's like... they know they are doing ****** things their players don't want and expect us to "understand" that they want to bleed us for more so they 'have to' have a **** design.

also
MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK

As I said before it takes a minimum of 5 clicks to switch stuff out of your mechs. Keep on trolling though.

[Captain Stiffy]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

As I said before it takes a minimum of 5 clicks to switch stuff out of your mechs. Keep on trolling though.

Explain exactly how. Click on mech, click configure, click the location, click to remove the item, click to save, click to confirm, that's 6 already and I'm not even done.

Oh yeah also

MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK

[Sephlock]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

As I said before it takes a minimum of 5 clicks to switch stuff out of your mechs. Keep on trolling though.

OTOH swapping engines over and over will slowly kill your soul.

And then there are modules...

[Roland]

Tesunie, on 18 May 2014 - 07:00 PM, said:

Of course I would prefer fewer clicks to get what I want done, but I don't overly mind at the same time a few extra clicks either.

But "what you mind" isn't really a useful metric. That's purely subjective.

Quote

I have a degree in Graphic Design. I believe my above post should have helped to clarify that point, as I explained things from a design standpoint. I also am not saying UI2.0 is perfect, because it is not. However, it is functional and it is workable. It isn't game breaking and it isn't preventing me from playing the game. It could use a lot of work still.

Does your degree actually involve user interface design? The reason I ask is because usually, graphic design doesn't actually focus on that particular aspect.

Not to say that user interface design doesn't involve elements of graphic design. But in many cases, a graphic design degree is focused more on the art side of things. For instance, people who design advertisement layouts, or billboards, etc. are graphic designers.

In many cases, there are similar cognitive aspects of the consumer which must be considered, but it's often quite different when you move from non-interactive to interactive presentations.

Quote

I do notice that you ignored certain parts of my posts (the bottom section) which would lead to more productive posts and threads describing the problem, with a larger push on presenting solutions than just "bellyaching" over UI2.0.

I didn't ignore it. Those sections just didn't require a response.

On some level, I think that things have moved beyond the point where many of us bother offering up specific changes for PGI to implement... because PGI doesn't listen to us when we do. Check that second link in my sig. I've made numerous posts akin to that, offering up fairly detailed suggestions. Many others have done the same. Mostly, they seem to fall on deaf ears.

The reason why folks are bitter, is because we've been repeatedly lied to.

You've been around since 2012... The forums weren't like this back then, were they? Things used to be pretty positive in these forums, with an incredibly supportive community. But PGI destroyed that good will.

Now, to his credit, Niko is working on improving PGI's relationship with its community. But honestly, at this point? I suspect it may be beyond hope of repair. A lot of folks are just waiting for the DFM to come out in Star Citizen.

Quote

UI 2.0 is here to stay for a while. We aren't going to get UI1.5 back. We might as well adapt to what we have now for the moment, and then make suggestions and nicely worded opinions about the system to try and help PGI improve the system overall.

The thing is, when it went into test, people told PGI about the problems... and most of that feedback was plainly ignored, and when it was eventually released the interface looked prety much identical to what it looked like in the original concept mock-ups.

Honestly, there are a ton of things in the interface right now which were seemingly considered, and then just left unfinished... For instance, in the mechlab interface, when you see the (totally useless) interface with a million pictures of engines in it... up in the top left of the window is what appears to be a mechanism for switching to a list view. But it doesn't work. Not sure WHY it doesn't work, but it doesn't.

Quote

We defenders mention that UI is flawed, but does work. Attackers take this as us saying it's perfect and is fine as it is. We defenders than have to defend ourselves and restate that it is flawed, but functional. Then the attackers continue to berate us saying how... and the cycle continues.

You should realize that saying "It's flawed but it works" is a totally pointless and empty statement. Yes, of course the interface functions. People are in fact able to play the game.

But that's not the measurement of a good user interface. Simply because it's not so broken that it prevents playing the game is not actually a defense. I could make a hammer that was just a cylindrical lead rod... It'd be able to drive nails, but it'd do a poor job at it. The fact that it could technically function as a hammer would not mean that it was a well designed hammer.

[Bishop Steiner]

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

You've been around since 2012... The forums weren't like this back then, were they? Things used to be pretty positive in these forums, with an incredibly supportive community. But PGI destroyed that good will.

actually, these forums have been pretty toxic almost the entire 2 years I've been here.

[Dymlos2003]

Sephlock, on 18 May 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

OTOH swapping engines over and over will slowly kill your soul.

And then there are modules...

I own only a handful of engines haha and I keep my modules in my most used mechs so I have a few to choose from. Could be optimized more but the player could do some of the work for now.

Bishop Steiner, on 18 May 2014 - 07:20 PM, said:

actually, these forums have been pretty toxic almost the entire 2 years I've been here.

Yeah and the same people (who stayed) still do the same as they did back then.

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

But "what you mind" isn't really a useful metric. That's purely subjective.



Does your degree actually involve user interface design? The reason I ask is because usually, graphic design doesn't actually focus on that particular aspect.

Not to say that user interface design doesn't involve elements of graphic design. But in many cases, a graphic design degree is focused more on the art side of things. For instance, people who design advertisement layouts, or billboards, etc. are graphic designers.

In many cases, there are similar cognitive aspects of the consumer which must be considered, but it's often quite different when you move from non-interactive to interactive presentations.



I didn't ignore it. Those sections just didn't require a response.

On some level, I think that things have moved beyond the point where many of us bother offering up specific changes for PGI to implement... because PGI doesn't listen to us when we do. Check that second link in my sig. I've made numerous posts akin to that, offering up fairly detailed suggestions. Many others have done the same. Mostly, they seem to fall on deaf ears.

The reason why folks are bitter, is because we've been repeatedly lied to.

You've been around since 2012... The forums weren't like this back then, were they? Things used to be pretty positive in these forums, with an incredibly supportive community. But PGI destroyed that good will.

Now, to his credit, Niko is working on improving PGI's relationship with its community. But honestly, at this point? I suspect it may be beyond hope of repair. A lot of folks are just waiting for the DFM to come out in Star Citizen.


The thing is, when it went into test, people told PGI about the problems... and most of that feedback was plainly ignored, and when it was eventually released the interface looked prety much identical to what it looked like in the original concept mock-ups.

Honestly, there are a ton of things in the interface right now which were seemingly considered, and then just left unfinished... For instance, in the mechlab interface, when you see the (totally useless) interface with a million pictures of engines in it... up in the top left of the window is what appears to be a mechanism for switching to a list view. But it doesn't work. Not sure WHY it doesn't work, but it doesn't.


You should realize that saying "It's flawed but it works" is a totally pointless and empty statement. Yes, of course the interface functions. People are in fact able to play the game.

But that's not the measurement of a good user interface. Simply because it's not so broken that it prevents playing the game is not actually a defense. I could make a hammer that was just a cylindrical lead rod... It'd be able to drive nails, but it'd do a poor job at it. The fact that it could technically function as a hammer would not mean that it was a well designed hammer.

This is why I hate pseudo-intellectual talk>_>

I couldn't resist.


People make long posts when they want to sound smart, right?



Too perfect >_<

(I know it goes against the whole squidward thing I said before but man perfect)

Edited by Dymlos2003, 18 May 2014 - 07:28 PM.

[Captain Stiffy]

MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK MOUSE *BEEP* CLICK

*BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP* *BEEP*